PMOI, MEK, IRAN: Message by political prisoner Saeed Massouri

NCRI - Iranian political prisoner Saeed Masouri, who is imprisoned in Iran’s Gohardasht Prison in the city of Karaj, north-west of Tehran, over his affiliation with the main Iranian opposition group People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI, or MEK) has sent out a message on the occasion of the Shiite Islamic holy day of Ashura. Parts of his message make a comparison between Western appeasement of the mullahs’ regime in Iran and the appeasement of Nazi Germany by then French Prime Minister Philippe Pétain.

Parts of a message by steadfast political prisoner, Saeed Masouri - October 24, 2015, Gohardasht Prison, Karaj, Iran:

Perhaps the most famous case in contemporary world history of compromise with an aggressor that apparently had glory and power was the deal by Marshal Philippe Pétain [of France] with Adolf Hitler (because it was the most obvious negotiation and appeasement over something that was non-negotiable...). Not only did it not solve any problem from him but it made him an appendix of the dominant and aggressive power, despite the fact that he was considered a hero of the First World War. Failure to resist against the aggressor put him on the side of Hitler and against his own people ... and perhaps like "Chamberlain" he saw peace and tranquility in appeasement and compromise… And certainly he was calling himself a peace seeker aiming at preventing further bloodshed… And he sought international non-violence and peace…

But we saw what a terrible massacre and disaster it led to! Perhaps this was not a good example, but I just wanted to bring witness to the case that when injustice is evident, aggression, injustice and corruption need no proof and evidence (especially when the machinery of aggression and oppression has worked systematically); in such cases what’s there to negotiate and appease and compromise over? What relationship do chit-chatting, socializing and group photos between oppressors and the oppressed have to morality and what is called moral philosophy? In there any message other than further weakening the victims and convincing them (within the agreement framework!) to be stripped of their rights? And then giving it a legitimate form and a legal platform?

In the current situation of our homeland [Iran] today, when the European Union, the Secretary General of the United Nations or anyone else only express concerns over the "high number of executions", doesn't this mean that a lower number, such as 1000, is okay!? And those who make such a deal, have they not bargained away their own conscience? And why not other deals? In any negotiation, negotiating parties must retreat to some extent to reach within the limits of the agreement. However, when it comes to the parties of such conflicts, one seeks the rights of his people, and the other usurps the rights of people and considers it his own property!

Moreover, aren’t these negotiations and appeasement a kind of encouragement and legitimization of oppression and oppressors? Wouldn't it give the idea that if part of the usurped rights can be claimed, why not the rest?

Oh God! If you are set on taking away my human dignity and values, first of all take my life! (215) Because a human being without human values is tantamount to rejecting humanity itself, and talking about justice, promotion and perfection … is futile and useless!

Saeid Masouri, October 24, 2015, Gohardasht Prison, Karaj