There were 1,487 press releases posted in the last 24 hours and 413,063 in the last 365 days.

(Video) Ambs. Lincoln Bloomfield Attends Senate Meeting in Support of Iran Protests

Ambs. Lincoln Bloomfield Jr., Assistant Secretary of the US State for Political-Military Affairs, addressed a bipartisan conference in the US Senate on Thursday and presented evidence to dispel some of the allegations about Iran’s principal opposition group MEK.

Ambs. Lincoln Bloomfield Jr., Assistant Secretary of the US State for Political-Military Affairs, addressed a bipartisan conference in the US Senate on Thursday and presented evidence to dispel some of the allegations about Iran’s principal opposition group MEK.

In his remarks, Ambassador Bloomfield also rejected the concept of the return of the ousted monarchy to Iran and how Shah’s offspring, Reza Pahlavi, helps the regime to detract the uprising from its main course by marketing the deposed Pahlavi dictatorship.

In his remarks, Ambassador Bloomfield also rejected the concept of the return of the ousted monarchy to Iran and how Shah’s offspring, Reza Pahlavi, helps the regime to detract the uprising from its main course by marketing the deposed Pahlavi dictatorship.

In the Washington Post, William Brannigan quoted " the people who killed the Americans. They admitted it, and they were put to death. They were not part of Masoud Rajavi‘s MEK.  In fact, they broke away from them. They killed some members of the MEK as well."

In the Washington Post, William Brannigan quoted " the people who killed the Americans. They admitted it, and they were put to death. They were not part of Masoud Rajavi‘s MEK. In fact, they broke away from them. They killed some members of the MEK as well."

Ambs. Bloomfield: "MEK never fought side by side with the Iraqis and they had nothing to do with [the massacre of] the Kurds and the Shia. The only evidence is to blame the MEK for things that the regime was doing against the Kurds."

Ambs. Bloomfield: "MEK never fought side by side with the Iraqis and they had nothing to do with [the massacre of] the Kurds and the Shia. The only evidence is to blame the MEK for things that the regime was doing against the Kurds."

Ambassador Bloomfield: "500,000 people took to the streets on June 20, 1981, peacefully at the behest of Masood Rajavi. There were similar demonstrations in cities all across the country. That’s what led the regime to open fire and start the reign of terror. "

Ambassador Bloomfield: "500,000 people took to the streets on June 20, 1981, peacefully at the behest of Masood Rajavi. There were similar demonstrations in cities all across the country. That’s what led the regime to open fire and start the reign of terror. "

In his remarks, Ambassador Bloomfield rejected the concept of the return of the ousted monarchy to Iran and how Shah’s offspring, Reza Pahlavi helps the regime.

Ambs. Bloomfield: "500,000 people took to the streets on June 20, 1981, at the behest of Masood Rajavi and similar demos in cities all across Iran. The regime opened fire and start a reign of terror."”
— NCRI
PARIS, FRANCE, March 20, 2023 /EINPresswire.com/ -- Ambassador Lincoln Bloomfield Jr., Assistant Secretary of the US State for Political-Military Affairs, addressed a bipartisan conference in the US Senate on Thursday and presented evidence to dispel some of the allegations about Iran’s principal opposition group, the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI / MEK).Amb. Lincoln Bloomfield Attends Senate Meeting in Support of Iran Protests.

In his remarks, Ambassador Bloomfield also rejected the concept of the return of the ousted monarchy to Iran and how Shah’s offspring, Reza Pahlavi, helps the regime to detract the uprising from its main course by marketing the deposed Pahlavi dictatorship.

Below is Ambassador Bloomfield’s speech in full text:

Greetings to our friends from the Organization of Iranian American communities. Greetings to the legislators here on Capitol Hill and professional staff.

Thank you for your service. And I extend that thanks to those who’ve served before, including my distinguished colleagues at the front table. It’s an honor to stand with you.

And to those who may hear the message, to Mrs. Rajavi, to the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), to the MEK, and to the brave people of Iran who are standing up for their rights, I salute you. And I’m happy to be here today. Happy Nowruz.


I have the task today of awarding the distinction of who has been the most truthful about what happened with the regime and with the resistance for the last four decades. The nominees are:

– Governments, including our own, and Western governments.

– The media, starting with the most established media in here, in Britain, in Europe, and elsewhere.

You’re looking at the truth. The Washington Post, William Brannigan, a great foreign correspondent, 1976. He talked to the people. He quoted the people who killed the Americans. There they are. They admitted it, and they were put to death.

They were not part of Masoud Rajavi‘s MEK. They had nothing to do with them. In fact, they broke away from them. They were secular. They were Marxists. Some of them were trained in East Germany and Cuba and they killed some members of the Islamic pro-Rajavi MEK as well. So this is a calumny against the MEK. They did not kill Americans in the 70s.

What about the key role in the hostage crisis? Well, you’ve heard that they helped Khomeini to hold on to the American Embassy. And we’ve written about how they were rivals. How the prime minister [referring to then interim Prime Minister Mehdi Bazargan] resigned in protest. He was a pro-Mosaddeq, Bazargan. These were the MEK’s political heroes. They were at odds.

Let me read to you from 1980. June 14, the New York Times. This is in Tehran. You tell me whether Rajavi’s MEK was helping Khomeini with the hostage crisis:

“Pitched battles were fought here yesterday between members of the peoples of Mujahideen, Iran’s largest leftist opposition group, and fundamentalist Muslim supporters of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. ‘Downward the deviationist’, Khomeini supporters shouted yesterday as they tried to force their way into the stadium where the people’s Mojahedin were holding a rally. And what was the position of Mr. Rajavi? Well, the crowd chanted in rhythm at his rally: ‘We will pursue the struggle’. Yes, answered Mr. Rajavi. ‘The struggle will last until victory, whatever the number of our martyrs may be.’
That sounds familiar. ‘What are we being attacked for?’ The speaker went on. ‘We are good Muslims. We are told that we live in the Islamic Republic but we are being besieged by hooligans and terrorists. The Islamic Constitution guarantees all liberties in principle, but we are forbidden access to the newspapers, to the radio, to television, and to parliament.’
‘Do you hear?’ Mr. Rajavi asked. He addressed himself to Hezbollah. ‘We are neither Communists nor Pro-Soviet, as you claim. We are fighting for the total freedom and independence of Iran. You are the reactionary Muslims who, under the cover of accusations thrown at us, try and serve the Occidental imperialism.”

I could go on. That’s 1980 the New York Times. That’s the truth. They were not involved with and supportive of the hostage crisis.

Were they Marxists? Well, I’ll bet that most of the people who repeat that accusation that they’re Marxist never studied Marx as I did as an undergraduate at Harvard studying political development. But someone who really looked into Masoud Rajavi’s interest in the Marxist study of inequality was Syracuse University Professor Mehrzad Boroujerdi.

“1996- Rajavi saves his most extensive critical commentary for Marxist materialistic epistemology. The group remained skeptical of Marxism’s philosophical postulates and rejected the latter’s Cardinal doctrine of historical materialism.” It gets a little bit complicated. “It held firm to the beliefs in the existence of God’s revelation, the afterlife, the spirit, salvation, destiny, the people’s commitment to these intangible principles.”
So, Rajavi was not a Marxist. The MEK was not a Marxist group. They never had an office in a Marxist country.


– Others who criticize the regime. Academics, some feminists, and people talk about the ability to move the hijab a little bit further back and why this is not allowed and perhaps restore the monarchy to Iran.

– or the NCRI, the MEK, the OIAC, and all of the supporters in this room, including the legislators who support the legislation that Senator Lieberman just mentioned.

And the award goes… to you, the NCRI, the MEK, the OIAC, and their supporters in Congress and in the United States. Congratulations!

Let me show you why that’s true. Buckle up. I’m going to go right very quickly through the facts that justify what I’ve just said. These people [referring to the MEK], you hear it even today. You’ve heard it for 40 years. They killed Americans in the 1970s.

But oops. Time magazine, November 23, 1981: Who did come to Tehran? KGB groups, several of them, invited by Ayatollah Khomeini. Why? To help them keep the lid on after they started a reign of terror in 1981 which Professor Marvin Zonus of the University of Chicago referred to as a campaign of mass slaughter.

The people of the 40 different groups of the OIAC, I am sure, had relatives who were imprisoned, tortured, and killed. And that is why so many of them came to America and so many of them have spent their lives committed to this cause.

So that’s who was Marxist? It wasn’t the MEK. Did they fight on Saddam’s side? We’ve already debunked all of that. I will argue that Khomeini triggered the war by trying to lay claim to half of Iraq and have Saddam Hussein deposed. But never mind that.

The point is that when Saddam attacked in 1980, the MEK ran to the front and defended their country. Many were taken POW. They were not released until 1989. They were not the allies of Saddam Hussein. They weren’t even there until mid-1986. They didn’t have any weapons till 87.

They never fought side by side with the Iraqis and they had nothing to do with [the massacre of] the Kurds and the Shia. The only evidence of that attempts at false flag operations is to blame the MEK for things that the Iranians were doing against the Kurds. They did not fight on Saddam’s side.

What about the money? How many times have we heard: “Where do they get all the money for these huge rallies in Europe? Where does the money come from? Is it the CIA? Is it Mossad? No, it must be the Saudis. Wait a minute. It’s Saddam Hussein who gave them billions.”

Listen, this event will be shown on television in Iran. That network has held two telethons to raise money every year since 2004. That’s about 36 telethons.

These successful people in the west have openly and constantly supported them except for the 15 years when the MEK and the NCRI were on the terrorism list. Very clever of the regime to prevent them from being able to send money. But there’s great support from the entire diaspora.

And by the way, the son of the Shah Reza Pahlavi, just a word on that. The New York Times reported that his family took two to four billion dollars out of Iran at the time of the revolution. People, his supporters will say that it was all tied up in courts.

But he himself said he had about $62 million, which in 2023 is about a quarter of a billion dollars. How much of that has gone back to Iran? How much of that has tried to support the uprising? I would venture to say zero.

So, let’s look at how the United States government has described these very same matters.

1985- A distinguished colleague, Assistant Secretary of State Dick Murphy, testified before the House Subcommittee on Europe and the Middle East, Lee Hamilton’s committee. At the end of it, he made some disparaging comments about the MEK. Chairman Hamilton said, “Excuse me, what was that all about?” And Secretary Murphy said, “Well, my staff said that I should say something at the end.”

Interesting. Well, now we know that what happened was in Iran’s arms for a hostage affair, condition number four of the list of things that were supposed to be given to Iran was, this the Tower Commission report: An official announcement terming the Mojahedin-e-Khalq organization terrorist and Marxist. The issuance of a circular to Congress and to all American firms and institutions and et cetera, et cetera.

In other words, they did it for the Iranians and at their behest.

1997- They [the MEK] were put on the terrorism list. We now know that the FBI was never told in advance. The director himself was told about it after the fact. There was no dossier that led to that designation. It was entirely a gesture to the Khatami government which had just come in.

2004- Ambassador Bolton will enjoy this one because two years prior, the NCRI had revealed the existence of secret enrichment. So, two years later there was frantic diplomacy to try to come to some terms, and here’s an IAEA circular dated 26 November 2004. And of course, it’s all about the nuclear discussions they’ve had. Until you get to the very end and it says:

“Irrespective of progress on the nuclear issue, the E3, the EU, and Iran confirm their determination to combat terrorism, including the activities of Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups such as the MEK. They also confirm their continued support for progress in Iraq.”

Really? That’s interesting because not even a year before, in Iraq, every single member of the MEK, which was at Camp Ashraf in Iraq, had been interrogated by an interagency group of seven law enforcement and criminal justice organizations from Washington. Every single person. And so clean were their records that everyone was given a contract by the United States.

This is Major General Jeffrey D. Miller:

“July 21, 2004- the same time as this communique, saying: “I’m writing to congratulate each individual living in Camp Ashraf on their recognition as protected persons under the Fourth Geneva Convention. This determination will assist in expediting the efforts of international organizations to place them. You have signed an agreement rejecting violence and terrorism.”

They had given up every single weapon, according to the late great General Ray Odiano, who was the commander of the Fourth ID in Iraq. And the State Department confirmed that they were never belligerent during that conflict. Nevertheless, the US government and the Europeans were calling them terrorists.

I spent some time and went through 19 years of annual reports on terrorism. And the only time they really told the truth was in the 2005 report where they said: “A Marxist element of the MEK group helped murdered several of the Shah’s US security advisors prior to the Islamic Revolution.”

Well, that’s interesting. That disappeared the next year, never to be repeated again. But they admitted that it was a splinter group. It was not the Rajavi MEK.

So, in 2006, we have the annual report. Take a look at that picture. This will give you an idea of how I must have felt when I was reading these terrorism reports, looking at the real information, and then reading a line like this in the 2006 report:

Following its participation in the 1979 Islamic Revolution, meaning the MEK, the group rapidly fell out of favor with the Iranian people.”

That’s 500,000 people taking to the streets on June 20, 1981, at the behest of Masood Rajavi. There were similar demonstrations in cities all across the country. That’s what led the regime to open fire and start the reign of terror.

So, you keep going, and it just gets worse. They keep adding to these.

2011- They start talking about setting off bombs 39 years earlier to protest the visit of Richard Nixon and then another one for Henry Kissing. This is 39 years.

The law allows ISIS-K to get off the terrorism list in about three years. If they clean up their act and say we’ve renounced terrorism. 39 years earlier, we’re building this case in the annual terrorism reports.

Even the current US envoy in Iran, Mr. Malley, has disparaged the MEK. Why?

“The United States does not see the MEK as a viable democratic opposition movement that is representative of the Iranian people. The State Department continues to have serious concerns about the MEK.”

Really? So, you have to ask, even in 2023, you and I still hear these voices repeating the toxic demonization of the NCRI, the MEK, and Mrs. Rajavi.
So just imagine how furious Congress and the officials in the US government must have been a generation ago when these memories of killing the Americans, taking the hostages, Marxists were fresh in their minds.

Do you really think that the late great Senator and then-Congressman John McCain would have penned a letter in 1984 to Masood Rajavi saying, “The efforts of the National Council of Resistance to end the brutality in Iran are truly laudable? And I commend you and your compatriots for the courage shown in your endeavor. The hopes of all Americans for a better Iran are with you.”

Shahin Gobadi
NCRI
+33 6 61 65 32 31
email us here

State Department confirmed that they were never belligerent during that conflict. But, the US government and the Europeans were calling them terrorists.