Executive Summary
For more than four decades, the clerical regime in Tehran has waged a relentless war of disinformation against its principal opposition, the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK) and the broader coalition, the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI). Unable to defeat the Resistance through massacres or politically, the regime has built one of the world’s most elaborate demonization machines.
This machinery encompasses state-controlled media, front organizations disguised as NGOs, turncoat ex-members, cyber armies numbering 80,000 operatives, and sophisticated influence operations targeting Western think tanks, universities, and parliaments. At its core, the regime seeks to promote a single narrative: that the MEK, as the principal opposition, has no real support inside Iran, and that there is no viable alternative to the current regime. By portraying the MEK as illegitimate, isolated, or extremist, Tehran aims to convince international community that they must deal with the clerical regime as the only option, thereby discouraging international engagement with the Iranian Resistance and weakening support among Iranians.
The campaign is not abstract. Western lawmakers and dignitaries have been personally targeted. Colombian presidential candidate Ingrid Betancourt faced immediate defamation after speaking at an MEK event. UK parliamentarians have warned of Iranian intelligence agents posing as constituents. American authorities have arrested covert operatives like Kaveh Afrasiabi, paid hundreds of thousands of dollars by Tehran to pose as an “academic” while spreading propaganda.
Revelations in 2023 about the Iran Experts Initiative (IEI) further exposed how Tehran penetrated Western think tanks and policy circles, enlisting academics to advocate engagement with the regime while dismissing the NCRI as a viable alternative.
Despite these efforts, Tehran’s campaign has failed to erase the Resistance. The very ferocity of the demonization proves the MEK’s relevance. Internatioanl leaders from across the political spectrum have testified that the regime’s obsession with the MEK is the strongest evidence of its effectiveness and legitimacy.
Inside Iran, MEK Resistance Units continue to challenge the regime daily, coordinating protests and acts of defiance. Abroad, the NCRI and its President-elect Mrs. Maryam Rajavi offer a democratic vision through a widely supported Ten-Point Plan, endorsed by thousands of lawmakers worldwide.
The key point is that articles, reports, and narratives smearing the MEK should be approached with scrutiny rather than accepted at face value. They are often the direct product of Tehran’s influence operations. Recognizing and exposing this campaign is not only a matter of truth—it is essential to ensuring that democratic alternative to dictatorship in Iran is not silenced by a library of lies.
Introduction: A Western Politician Under Siege
Ingrid Betancourt, the Colombian presidential candidate and former senator, vividly recalls the first time she spoke at an event organized by the Iranian Resistance. Almost overnight, she found herself the target of a ferocious campaign. Anonymous accounts smeared her reputation; articles suddenly surfaced in obscure outlets branding her as naïve or manipulated; and coordinated messages flooded social media, all echoing the same talking points against Iran’s main opposition, the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK). “They unleashed a flood,” she later recalled in a European Parliament address, “and I could see it was not spontaneous. It was orchestrated. It was a machine designed to silence anyone who dared to stand with the Iranian Resistance.”
“The mullahs kill physically, but they also kill morally through defamation,” Betancourt said in a 2019 speech at Ashraf 3. “You can’t change the truth by writing lies.”
Her experience is not unique. From Washington to Brussels, from the United Nations to national parliaments, countless lawmakers, journalists, and human rights defenders who dared to support the Iranian Resistance have faced the same barrage. What may appear to the casual observer as organic criticism is, in reality, the product of one of the most elaborate disinformation machines of our time—an apparatus designed, funded, and directed by Tehran.
For more than four decades, the clerical regime in Tehran has pursued a singular obsession: the destruction of its main opposition, the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK) and the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI). Unable to defeat them through massacres, the regime has invested vast resources in demonization campaigns aimed at discrediting Resistance at home and abroad.
The Logic of Demonization
Authoritarian regimes often thrive on controlling the narrative. For the ayatollahs, the challenge is especially acute. From the earliest days of the Islamic Republic, Iran’s rulers identified the MEK not as a marginal opponent but as their most dangerous adversary.
In June 1980, just months after consolidating power, Ayatollah Khomeini, then the Supreme Leader, declared: “The enemy is not America, nor the Soviet Union. The enemy is the hypocrites”—the pejorative he coined for the MEK. That framing was not rhetorical. It inaugurated four decades of systematic repression: executions, torture, massacres, and a relentless propaganda war.
The summer of 1988 revealed the depth of this fear. In the span of a few months, more than 30,000 political prisoners, mostly members and supports of the MEK, were executed under a fatwa issued by Khomeini.
Despite decades of repression, executions, and censorship, the MEK has survived and, through its Resistance Units inside Iran, emerged as a central force in organizing protests. To neutralize this threat, Tehran deploys a multi-layered psychological warfare campaign to isolate the MEK internationally and dishearten Iranians domestically.
The strategy is straightforward: by portraying the MEK—the principal opposition—as marginal, extremist, or a “cult,” the regime seeks to convince both domestic and international audiences that it has no real support inside Iran and that no alternative exists. In doing so, Tehran aims to plant doubt among Iranians about the viability of the organized Resistance while signaling to Western governments that they have no choice but to deal with the clerical regime as the only option. Demonization, therefore, is not merely propaganda but a central pillar of the regime’s survival strategy.
A Propaganda Empire Built on Lies
Iran’s disinformation machine is vast. Over the years, it has produced more than 198 films, documentaries, and TV series attacking the MEK, alongside over 538 books and tens of thousands of articles through front organizations like Nejat Society and Habilian Foundation. These outlets churn out daily content depicting the MEK as terrorists, traitors, or frauds—echoing precisely the narratives of state-run media in Tehran.
But the campaign does not stop at state-controlled television or obscure publications in Farsi. It extends into the global information space, with carefully crafted English-language content, planted stories in respected Western outlets, and an army of cyber operatives trained to pose as independent voices.
The Cyber Army: 80,000 Strong
One of the regime’s most potent tools is its cyber force. Iranian officials themselves have boasted about it. In 2019, Gholamreza Soleimani, the commander of the Basij militia publicly admitted that at least 80,000 cyber operatives were active in spreading regime narratives online.
These accounts operate with remarkable sophistication. Many present themselves as reformists, monarchists, or even regime-change advocates, but always include a consistent twist: hostility toward the MEK. The purpose is to create the illusion of a broad consensus that, while Iranians may want change, they reject the organized Resistance. In short, their mission is to flood the digital space with disparagement of the Resistance and intimidate anyone who amplifies its message.
A report by the independent cybersecurity firm Treadstone 71 in 2020 documented how, following the NCRI’s global online summit that year, Tehran unleashed a massive influence operation. Fake accounts—often using the personas of young women—portrayed themselves as ordinary Iranian dissidents while relentlessly attacking the MEK. Nearly half of these accounts were bots or recycled “zombie” profiles, designed to amplify the smear narrative.
Ruhollah Mo’men Nasab, a former official in Iran’s Culture Ministry, later admitted: “We created new accounts on Twitter using the persona of other influencers… Everything was fake. Once created, we started our activities. It was a psychological operation.” His candid words stripped away any illusion that such campaigns were organic.
Exporting Lies: From Tehran to Western Newsrooms
Perhaps the most insidious element of Tehran’s campaign is how disinformation migrates from Iranian state outlets into the pages of respected Western media. Some turncoat ex-members of the MEK, recruited by the Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS), are packaged as “credible sources.” They are coached to follow the so-called 80/20 rule: criticize the regime 80% of the time to build trust, and dedicate the remaining 20% to attacking the MEK.
These “critics” then serve as sources for major outlets. In 2019, Der Spiegel published a lengthy feature portraying the MEK’s Albanian headquarters in sinister terms. Subsequent investigations revealed that much of the reporting relied on MOIS-linked ex-members turned regime collaborators, whose accounts were riddled with inconsistencies. One of its central sources, Gholamreza Shekari, claimed to have been “imprisoned and tortured” by the MEK 24 years earlier.
Yet even before the article appeared in German, the MOIS’s own front group, the Nejat Association, published a Persian translation of Shekari’s interview on November 24, 2018 — the very date Der Spiegel had originally planned to release the piece. This remarkable timing exposed that the draft text had been shared in advance with Tehran’s intelligence services, a blatant violation of journalistic ethics. Subsequent investigations further revealed glaring inconsistencies in the accounts of these regime-linked turncoat ex-members. Instead of upholding responsible journalism, Der Spiegel provided a platform for state propaganda, misleading readers with material effectively authored and pre-approved by the Iranian Ministry of Intelligence.
Following the publication of Der Spiegel’s defamatory feature “Prisoners of Rebellion” on February 16, 2019, the German representative office of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) brought the case before the Hamburg Regional Court. On March 21, 2019, the Press Chamber ruled in favor of the NCRI, prohibiting Der Spiegel from publishing or repeating allegations of torture and grotesque claims—such as MEK members “practicing cutting throats with knives three times a week”—on the grounds that these assertions were demonstrably false and violated basic journalistic standards. The court warned that any future infringement would result in fines of up to €250,000 or imprisonment. Pursuant to the injunction, Der Spiegel was forced to remove the offending passages from its article, a striking legal confirmation that the piece had relied on fabricated narratives promoted by Tehran’s Ministry of Intelligence.
Similarly, The New York Times has faced criticism for uncritically citing such voices. On February 16, 2020, The New York Times published a highly problematic article by Patrick Kingsley, recycling a series of unsubstantiated claims against the MEK. At the time, detailed rebuttals were submitted to the paper’s senior editors, pointing out that several of the individuals cited were in fact operatives of the Iranian Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS). The Times never replied. The full extent of this deception became clear on March 4, 2025, when the article’s central source, Abdolrahman Mohammadian, wrote to the UN Secretary-General admitting that he had been recruited by the MOIS in 2016 and had coordinated the activities of other regime agents as part of a broader disinformation campaign. In light of this confession, the NCRI’s legal counsel, Professor Steven Schneebaum, wrote to The New York Times on April 21, 2025. urging the paper to retract the piece or at least acknowledge that it relied heavily on sources later exposed as Iranian intelligence operatives. As of today, the Times has yet to respond.
The impact is corrosive. Once planted in mainstream media, these narratives gain legitimacy, shaping policymakers’ perceptions even when later debunked.
The regime’s reliance on turncoat ex-members is part of a broader psychological operations doctrine. As the U.S. Library of Congress noted in a 2012 report: “From 1990–93, [MOIS] recruited former members of the Mojahedin-e-Khalq (MEK)… and used them to launch a disinformation campaign against MEK. The Iranian government and its intelligence apparatus consider MEK the most serious dissident organization.” This is the essence of the 80/20 policy: former insiders appear credible by criticizing Tehran most of the time, while slipping in lethal attacks against the MEK.
The Friendly Journalist: Exporting Tehran’s Narrative
If the cyber army is the spear of Tehran’s demonization campaign, friendly journalists are its camouflage. These are not uniformed propagandists in Tehran but respected bylines in Western publications, whose work is shaped—sometimes knowingly, sometimes not—by intelligence-fed narratives.
Documents and testimonies reveal how the MOIS cultivates freelancers and reporters, providing them access to the regime recruited “former MEK members” or inviting them on subsidized trips to Iran. In 2018, for instance, the Habilian Association—a well-known MOIS front—boasted of trying to recruit a reporter from The Daily Beast to publish stories hostile to the Resistance.
The case of Der Spiegel is perhaps the most notorious. In February 2019, the magazine ran a feature titled “Prisoners of the People’s Mojahedin,” portraying the MEK’s Albanian base as a sinister compound. Yet as the International Committee in Search of Justice (ISJ) later documented, the article relied heavily on turncoat ex-members linked to Iranian intelligence. German courts subsequently questioned the piece’s credibility, and Der Spiegel was forced to append clarifications.
The use of covert agents under journalistic cover has even been openly acknowledged by regime insiders. Former Intelligence Minister Ali Fallahian admitted in a July 2017 interview on state TV: “It is obvious that we don’t send an agent to Germany or America and say, I am an agent of the intelligence ministry. He would work under the cover of business or other jobs including reporters. You know, many of our reporters are actually ministry agents.”
and here is the role reporters like @hommer_ich @schwerin_von play for Iran straight from the mouth of Iran’s former intelligence Minister Ali Fallahian#Spiegel_FakeNews #Spiegel #FakeNews serving the Mullahs pic.twitter.com/nSTS6RS86i
— Zolal Habibi (@Ashrafi4ever) February 18, 2019
This laundering of disinformation is intentional. Once a narrative appears in a respected outlet, Tehran amplifies it through thousands of Persian-language reprints, citing “Western media” as proof. Thus, a single misinformed feature can echo for years inside Iran, validating propaganda that would otherwise appear too crude to believe.
Manufacturing False Narratives
The regime’s manipulation is not limited to whispers in parliamentary corridors or planted op-eds. In November 2019, the MOIS even fabricated a Twitter account impersonating Alexis Kohler, the Secretary-General of the French presidency. The account falsely claimed that France was about to expel the MEK. The day after, the Elysee Palace denied this statement, adding that this Twitter account did not belong to Alexis Kohler and that the senior official did not even have a Twitter account.
Another striking case was the attempted infiltration of European politics through front organizations. In 2008, Lord Corbett reported that agents posing as members of “Habilian,” a supposed NGO, had tried to contact MPs during parliamentary recess. Their sole mission was to slander the Resistance.
Lord Corbett, described how whenever an MP expressed support for the Iranian Resistance, they were “bombarded with misinformation” from the Iranian Embassy or MOIS front groups. These included NGOs with innocent-sounding names like Nejat Society or Peyvand Association, but in reality they were extensions of Tehran’s intelligence apparatus.
Steve McCabe, a British MP, warned his colleagues in 2011 that they might be approached by individuals posing as ordinary Iranians but in fact working for Tehran’s intelligence services. They would often recommend meetings with known MOIS operatives. “I’ve found that a firm response usually persuades them that they won’t succeed in intimidating me,” McCabe wrote.
The pattern is clear: by fabricating news, impersonating officials, and deploying front organizations, Tehran aims to normalize its narrative and wear down the credibility of the MEK among policymakers.
As Kazem Gharibabadi, the International Deputy of Iran’s Judiciary, admitted on June 24, 2022: “There is no meeting with ambassadors of European countries or delegations of European countries in which we do not bring up the issue of the Hypocrites [MEK].” This candid acknowledgment underscores how anti-MEK propaganda is not confined to media or cyber tactics but is woven into the very fabric of Tehran’s diplomacy.
Lobby Networks: How Tehran Shapes Western Narratives
While Tehran deploys cyber armies and front NGOs, another key prong of its disinformation campaign lies in Western think tanks, academia, and lobby groups. Posing as neutral experts, these figures were in fact coordinating with Iran’s Foreign Ministry, as revealed by leaked documents and investigative reports.
A publication by Friends of a Free Iran (FoFI) at the European Parliament, titled “Tracing Iran’s Web of Influence in European Politics: An Intense Campaign to Vilify Democratic Opposition” (Sept. 2023), shed light on this covert operation. At the center was the so-called “Iran Experts Initiative” (IEI), launched by Tehran’s Foreign Ministry in 2014 to cultivate ties with overseas academics and policy analysts. The aim was twofold: (1) push conciliatory narratives about Tehran’s nuclear and regional policies, and (2) delegitimize the NCRI and its principal member, the MEK, as “non-viable” alternatives.
Leaked emails (2003–2021) revealed how Iranian officials, including Saeed Khatibzadeh (former Foreign Ministry spokesman), coordinated with a network of “second-generation Iranians” who later assumed prominent roles in Western institutions:
Ali Vaez, Iran Project Director at the International Crisis Group, pledged “patriotic duty” to then-Foreign Minister Javad Zarif, offering help on nuclear messaging (2014).
Ariane Tabatabai, now Chief of Staff to the U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations, reported her activities directly to Iranian diplomats and even sought guidance on travel decisions.
Adnan Tabatabai, CEO of the German think tank CARPO and a relative of Ayatollah Khomeini, received over €2m in German government funding while drafting op-eds echoing Tehran’s line and vilifying the MEK.
Rouzbeh Parsi, head of the Middle East and North Africa Program at the Swedish Institute of International Affairs, authored EU reports minimizing Iran’s abuses and branding the MEK a “cult.”
Ellie Geranmayeh, Deputy Director of the Middle East and North Africa Program at the European Council on Foreign Relations, urged EU governments not to isolate Tehran during the 2022 uprising, advocating continued diplomacy.
Dina Esfandiary, Senior Adviser at the International Crisis Group, co-authored with Vaez in The New York Times (2021) urging engagement with Ebrahim Raisi despite his role in the 1988 massacre.
Beyond Europe, Tehran’s reach extended through the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), founded by Trita Parsi, later head of the Quincy Institute. U.S. court documents revealed NIAC’s close coordination with Javad Zarif during his tenure as Iran’s UN ambassador. Today, Quincy frequently echoes Tehran’s positions.
Within the European Parliament, Eldar Mamedov, senior adviser to the Socialists & Democrats group, was exposed during the 2022 “Qatargate” scandal while consistently publishing articles demonizing the MEK and reinforcing Tehran’s “no alternative” narrative.
Together, these cases illustrate the regime’s sophisticated lobbying apparatus: from Berlin to Brussels to Washington, Western-funded analysts and think-tankers advanced Tehran’s agenda while systematically discrediting Iran’s democratic opposition.
As the FoFI report concludes:
“This orchestrated campaign aims to demonize the democratic opposition of the NCRI and the main force for change, the MEK. The objective is to suggest that in the absence of a viable alternative, the only option is improving relations with the regime and ignore its malign and destructive activities.”
The Diversion Strategy: Enter Reza Pahlavi
One of the most cynical ploys in Tehran’s arsenal is the promotion of a “safe” alternative: Reza Pahlavi, the exiled son of the deposed Shah.
This strategy serves multiple goals:
Illusion of choice: It creates the false narrative that Iranians must choose between two forms of dictatorship—clerical rule or monarchy—thereby erasing the democratic alternative represented by the NCRI and MEK.
Manipulating protest slogans: State media and security forces have been caught deploying Basij agents into crowds to chant “Long live Reza Shah” during anti-regime demonstrations, deliberately muddying the genuine calls for “No to Shah, No to Mullahs” that reflect the public’s rejection of both tyrannies.
Luring dissidents into a dead end: By projecting the monarchy as an option, the regime hopes to absorb or neutralize discontent, fully aware that monarchism has little legitimacy inside Iran.
Political prisoner and teachers’ rights activist Hashem Khastar described the tactic bluntly: “The regime is trying to encourage dissidents to move toward the monarchists’ camp… to portray the MEK as the main enemy rather than the Islamic Republic.” In a post on his Telegram account, Khastar revealed that while he was in prison, IRGC officials approached him and asked whether he wanted Reza Pahlavi’s phone number, urging him to contact the Shah’s son instead of cooperating with the MEK.
This policy is not accidental. A leaked directive from former Intelligence Minister Mahmoud Alavi revealed explicit instructions that whenever regime media warn about the MEK, they must simultaneously mention “monarchists” or “Reza Pahlavi.” The objective: blur the line between organized resistance and the defunct monarchy so that the MEK “does not stand out in the minds of the younger generation.”
But the collaboration goes deeper:
Cooperation with IRGC and Basij: Reza Pahlavi himself has admitted to being in communication with the IRGC and Basij militia, arguing that they would be needed to maintain “order” after regime change. This shocking stance aligns directly with Tehran’s goal of ensuring continuity of its repressive apparatus under a recycled monarchist façade.
In sum, Reza Pahlavi’s role is less that of an independent opposition figure than that of a regime-manufactured diversion—a political cul-de-sac designed to mislead the West, fracture the opposition, and deny Iranians the recognition of their true democratic alternative.
When Propaganda Meets the Press
The Iranian regime has repeatedly used sleeper cells, pressure on journalists, attempts to buy influence, and even threats to expand its reach abroad. The following highlights a few illustrative cases of this pattern.
The case of Mehrdad Arefani illustrates the long-term strategy. Sentenced by a Belgian court in February 2021 to 17 years for his role in the attempted bombing of the NCRI’s 2018 Paris rally, Arefani had presented himself as a poet, atheist, and human rights activist. He even posed as a sympathizer of the MEK to infiltrate circles of exiles. In reality, he acted as a sleeper asset for nearly 18 years, feeding intelligence to Tehran. In a report to a Belgian tribunal, State Security concluded: “The MOIS continues to portray the opposition in a negative light and describes them as terrorists. The MOIS is particularly active in the field of anti-MEK propaganda in the European Parliament.”
Amnesty International (Sept. 4, 2009): Caspian Makan, fiancé of Neda Agha Soltan, was told he might be freed if he signed a forced confession blaming the MEK for her murder. Amnesty warned he was at risk of torture.
Toronto Sun (July 5, 2010): John Thompson of the Mackenzie Institute revealed he was offered $80,000 by an individual tied to Iran’s mission in Canada to publish an article branding the MEK a “terrorist cult.”
Associated Press (June 23, 2021): The U.S. seized nearly 100 Iranian state-linked websites masquerading as news outlets, part of a “global disinformation campaign.”
Perhaps the most revealing example is the case of Kaveh Afrasiabi. On January 19, 2021, the U.S. Department of Justice charged Afrasiabi for acting as an unregistered agent of Iran, in violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). For more than a decade, he wrote op-eds and appeared in U.S. media echoing Tehran’s positions while also attacking the MEK. Court documents revealed he had secretly received about $265,000 from the Iranian mission to the UN.
When Courts Become Tools of Demonization
On December 12, 2023, the clerical regime launched what it called a “trial” against the MEK, a process that has so far dragged on for two years with 38 sessions, and is still ongoing, with the latest hearing held on September 12, 2025.
This spectacle, featuring 105 supposed defendants—including the MEK as a legal entity—was never about justice. Rather, it was about recycling decades-old allegations, dressing up propaganda in legal garb, and broadcasting it through a tightly controlled media blitz. Billboards across Tehran, saturation coverage by state-run outlets, and uniform headlines left no doubt: the trial was designed for mass consumption at home and abroad.
The very choice of defendants exposed the charade. Among those listed was Ozra Alavi Taleghani, a prominent MEK member who had passed away in Tirana months before the proceedings began. Court-appointed lawyers were announced, but no independent defense was permitted. Instead of evidence or cross-examination, the sessions descended into long recitations of regime talking points about the MEK’s history, structure, and supposed “threat,” with prosecutors explicitly likening the organization to ISIS and vowing revenge. Families of alleged “victims” were staged in the courtroom, their presence serving as props for the prosecutor’s promises of retribution.
For the regime, the timing and scope of this sham trial reveal a deeper anxiety. The MEK has gained traction among Iran’s younger generations, who increasingly see the Resistance as a viable democratic alternative. By staging a court proceeding, the regime attempted to add a new layer of legitimacy to its demonization campaign, hoping to discredit the MEK in the eyes of ordinary Iranians. Yet the move has backfired. Even inside the ruling elite, critics warn that the trial has exposed the regime’s insecurity and may only fuel curiosity and sympathy for the Resistance.
State-run media such as Fars News were blunt in framing the trial as a battle against “internal enemies.” “The danger of the hypocrites is greater than other enemies,” one editorial claimed, insisting that “the Quran has directed its toughest attacks against the hypocrites.” But the reality was plain to observers: the court devoted more time to demonizing the MEK than to presenting evidence of actual crimes, underscoring that the true purpose was political theatre.
The contradictions have not gone unnoticed. While the sham court demonized the MEK as terrorists, the regime’s own record—over 100,000 members and supporters of the MEK executed, more than 500 terrorist operations abroad, and plots like the 2018 attempted bombing of an NCRI rally in Paris—stands in stark contrast. The attack on former European Parliament Vice President Alejo Vidal-Quadras in 2023, widely attributed to Tehran’s operatives, has yet to face any legal reckoning. This selective “justice” has reinforced the perception that the trial was designed only to justify repression and delegitimize the alternative posed by the NCRI.
By September 2025, as the sessions dragged on, fractures within the regime became clear. Some insiders argued that the spectacle had backfired, fueling international criticism and strengthening the MEK’s image as the only organized opposition the regime truly fears. Others insisted on continuing, believing the propaganda value outweighed the risks. These disputes highlight what the trial most of all revealed: a regime divided, insecure, and terrified of a Resistance that it cannot silence through executions, terror plots, or now, even through sham courts.
Western Voices of Warning
Countless Western dignitaries and senior officials have exposed this demonization campaign. Here are some of their testimonies:
Ingrid Betancourt – Former Colombian Senator & Presidential Candidate
“Iran has spent an enormous amount of money and resources to demonize the MEK. I myself was approached by people working with the Iranian regime, asking me to describe the MEK as a cult and a dangerous group. I refused, because I knew these were lies designed to destroy the only organized opposition. The regime knows that the MEK and Maryam Rajavi’s leadership represent hope for a democratic Iran, and that is why it attacks them relentlessly.”
Mike Pompeo – Former U.S. Secretary of State
“If the MEK truly had no influence, no following, and no credibility, why does the regime in Tehran spend billions of dollars every year on propaganda to demonize them? Why are there sermons every Friday prayer in Iran denouncing the MEK? This tells you something very important: the regime fears them more than anyone else. It fears the democratic platform they present, the alternative of Maryam Rajavi’s Ten-Point Plan. That is why Tehran tries so desperately to paint the MEK as a cult or worse than the regime itself.”
Dr. Franz-Josef Jung – Former German Defense Minister
“The clerical regime and its lobbyists in the West repeat the lie that the NCRI and MEK have no support inside Iran. But if that were true, why is there a nonstop campaign of demonization? Why spend enormous sums to produce films, books, TV series, and even social media armies to slander the opposition? The answer is simple: because the NCRI and MEK represent a well-organized democratic alternative, led by Maryam Rajavi, with a clear vision for a free Iran. The demonization campaign is the regime’s acknowledgment of its fear.”
Mike Pence – Former Vice President of the United States
“The regime’s lies and demonization against the MEK are proof of their fear. They call them terrorists, they call them a cult, but the reality is different: the MEK is committed to democracy, to women’s rights, and to a non-nuclear Iran. I have seen the determination of this movement firsthand in Ashraf-3. The truth is clear: the MEK is the alternative the mullahs fear most.”
Late Joseph Lieberman – Former U.S. Senator (Connecticut)
“No group has been the subject of more slander, more lies, and more disinformation than the MEK. Why? Because the regime in Tehran knows that this is the only organized force capable of replacing them. The demonization campaign is not a sign of the MEK’s weakness; it is the clearest evidence of their strength.”
Stephen Harper – Former Canadian PM
There is a viable alternative to the regime never believe the propaganda from the regime again far too often repeated in our Western Nations that the only alternative to the regime is chaos…there are alternatives… the National Council of Resistance of Iran have consistently entirely advocated a commitment to free elections freedom of assembly and expression pluralism and the rule of law human rights and gender equality the separation of religion and state and the autonomy of Iran’s ethnic minorities and of course a non-nuclear state at peace with the world that is your vision and it is worth fighting for.
Newt Gingrich – Former Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives
“The Iranian regime is desperate to convince the West that there is no alternative. That’s why they demonize Maryam Rajavi and the MEK. But I have been to their gatherings, I have met their members, and I know the truth: this is a movement of hope, not terror. The more the mullahs smear them, the more it proves how much they fear them.”
Louis Freeh – Former Director of the FBI
“I visited MEK members, I have investigated the allegations, and I can tell you: all the regime’s accusations are lies. The demonization of this movement is a massive propaganda campaign. There is no credible evidence to support these slanders. The MEK stands for values Americans share: democracy, freedom, equality.”
Candice Bergen – Former Leader of Canada’s Conservative Party
“When I attended an NCRI conference, I was immediately attacked—not for anything I said about the regime in Tehran, but simply for participating in the event. That was a red flag for me. It showed that the Iranian regime’s disinformation network works internationally to intimidate politicians and to smear anyone who gives a platform to the MEK or NCRI. This proves how much the regime fears the democratic alternative.”
Ambassador Lincoln Bloomfield Jr. – Former U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs
“For years, Tehran invested heavily in erecting a wall of lies around the MEK. But that wall is now crumbling. The disinformation campaign portraying the MEK as terrorists or a cult was never credible. Court rulings in the U.S. and Europe, bipartisan support in Congress, and the resilience of the Resistance Units inside Iran have shattered that narrative. What remains is the truth: the Iranian regime fears the MEK because it is organized, it is democratic, and it is the real alternative.”
Gen. James L. Jones – Former U.S. National Security Advisor, Supreme Allied Commander, NATO
“The Iranian regime has invested enormous resources in demonizing the MEK. They call them terrorists, a cult, illegitimate – but these are lies. I have met them, I have visited Ashraf-3. What I saw was a disciplined, democratic movement dedicated to freedom. The demonization campaign is the regime’s weapon of fear, and it shows that the MEK is the alternative they dread most.”
Gen. James Conway – Former Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps
“Repeating the regime’s lies about the MEK, as some officials have done, only strengthens Tehran’s hand. While the Resistance Units are risking their lives on the streets of Iran, spreading disinformation against them facilitates the regime’s killing machine. The demonization campaign is outrageous and must be rejected by all who believe in freedom.”
Patrick Kennedy – Former U.S. Congressman (Rhode Island)
“The Iranian regime never stops demonizing the MEK. They know that young Iranians are looking to this movement for leadership, so they spread lies in Western media and through so-called experts. It is our duty to expose these falsehoods and to stand with the democratic resistance.”
Prof. Ivan Sascha Sheehan – Executive Director, Univ. of Baltimore
“The Iranian regime’s propaganda aims to convince Western policymakers that the MEK is worse than the theocracy itself, so that Tehran is left as the only viable interlocutor. This is a textbook example of psychological warfare. It is not just about tarnishing the image of the MEK; it is about destroying the very idea of an alternative. In reality, the MEK is the best organized, most potent opposition force with a nationwide network and a democratic program. Tehran’s disinformation seeks to obscure that fact from both Iranians and the international community.”
Ted Poe – Former U.S. Congressman (Texas)
“The Iranian regime has no greater fear than the organized opposition. That is why every Friday prayer sermon includes chants against the MEK. That is why state TV runs endless programs against them. This demonization is the clearest evidence of the Resistance’s strength.”
Lord Corbett of Castle Vale – UK House of Lords (Late)
“Iran’s democratic coalition opposition, the National Council of Resistance of Iran, and its largest member organisation, the PMOI, have been at the forefront of exposing the regime’s crimes at home, terrorism, and nuclear programs. It is therefore no surprise that the regime has attempted to destroy the Resistance through torture, mass executions, bombings and assassinations. The regime’s Ministry of Intelligence concentrates its efforts on an elaborate, sophisticated and well-financed operation to tarnish the image of the Resistance at home and abroad.”
Lord Alton of Liverpool – UK House of Lords
“Whenever a Member of Parliament expresses support for the goals of freedom and a secular democracy for Iran, as espoused by the NCRI and PMOI, they are immediately bombarded with misinformation about Iran’s main opposition from a variety of sources. Sometimes MPs and Peers are contacted directly by the Iranian Embassy in London, which tries to convince Parliamentarians that they have misunderstood the Iranian regime and been deceived about the true nature of the NCRI and PMOI.”
Struan Stevenson – Former Member of European Parliament (Scotland)
“The Iranian Ministry of Intelligence (MOIS) has orchestrated a massive campaign of demonization. We now know from leaked documents that regime agents have posed as journalists for Western outlets such as Der Spiegel or The Guardian to plant fabricated stories against the MEK. These slanders have then been amplified inside Iran by state-run media, creating a vicious cycle of lies. This is not journalism; it is a state-sponsored propaganda operation with one aim: to delegitimize the only organized opposition to the mullahs.”
Paulo Casaca – Former Member of European Parliament
“I have come across a well-orchestrated propaganda and disinformation campaign by the Iranian regime primarily aimed at tarnishing the image of the main Iranian resistance movement, the NCRI and its affiliated organizations, such as the PMOI. This campaign inevitably reminds me of what Hitler’s propaganda minister, Josef Goebbels, said once: ‘Tell a lie that is big enough and repeat it often enough and the whole world will believe it.’”
Adam Ereli – Former U.S. Ambassador to Bahrain
“The MEK has done a great deal for the people of Iran and for the world. But perhaps the greatest testimony to your effectiveness is the fact that the Iranian regime hates you so much and will stop at nothing to destroy you. They have funded information campaigns against you. They have tried to convince journalists, governments, think tanks, that the MEK is an outlaw organization, that it doesn’t represent Iranians, that it has no following inside Iran. Well, the fact that they’re saying this indicates to me that the opposite is true. Otherwise, they wouldn’t be spending all this money and effort to present a false narrative.”
Judge Eugene Sullivan – Retired U.S. Federal Judge
“Repeating Tehran’s falsehoods against the MEK undermines the cause of democracy. I have seen firsthand the regime’s attempt to intimidate and smear the Resistance. But the truth always comes out. The demonization campaign has failed, and it will continue to fail.”
Prof. Alan Dershowitz – Harvard Law School
“Iran’s mullahs and their lobbyists in the West have tried to delegitimize the MEK with slander. These lies have been investigated and disproved repeatedly. Demonization is a form of political warfare. It should never be echoed by American officials.”
Robert Joseph – Former U.S. Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security
“The campaign to demonize the MEK is a disinformation operation, not an honest debate. The facts are clear: the MEK and NCRI stand for a secular, democratic Iran. The regime calls them terrorists, cultists, anything it can – but this is the language of dictators who fear losing power.”
Sen. Robert Torricelli – Former U.S. Senator (New Jersey)
“Repeating Tehran’s propaganda against the MEK is dangerous because it gives legitimacy to a dictatorship. The attacks on the MEK in the media or by certain officials are not neutral mistakes—they echo the regime’s intelligence ministry. The demonization is deliberate and designed to silence the alternative.”
Ambassador Kenneth Blackwell – Former U.S. Ambassador to the UN Human Rights Commission
“Despite decades of demonization, despite relentless propaganda, the MEK continues to inspire dissent inside Iran and support abroad. That tells us two things: first, the Iranian regime has failed in its goal of erasing the MEK from history; and second, the MEK represents the future. The smear campaigns only prove the regime’s fear. No government spends billions of dollars and mobilizes its embassies, agents, and media to destroy a group that supposedly has no support. The fact they do this shows how real the MEK’s threat to the dictatorship is.”
Conclusion:
The Iranian regime’s demonization machine is one of the most sophisticated disinformation campaigns in modern history. It relies on cyber trolls, front NGOs, bribed academics, infiltrated think tanks, and embassy pressure. Its goal is singular: destroy the credibility of the MEK and NCRI, the only organized alternative capable of replacing clerical rule with democracy.
Yet truth has a stubborn way of breaking through. The exposure of operations like the Iran Experts Initiative, the testimony of Western leaders, and the persistence of Resistance Units inside Iran reveal a regime fighting a losing battle.
The lies may be elaborate, but they cannot erase the reality that millions of Iranians yearn for freedom and see in the NCRI a democratic path forward. The clerical regime’s obsession with demonization is, in the end, the clearest proof of its fear.