Far too many Americans operate from the mindset that the "enemy of my enemy must be my friend." As such, still sore over the hostage crisis of a quarter century ago, and inclined to believe the worst accounts about Iran, simple Americans, conservative to liberal, leading Congressman to Faux News devotees, have been willing to believe the absurd claims about the Islamic Republic emanating from the Islamic Marxist CULT known to many as the People's Mujahedin of Iran.
As a result, we have "armies" of unthinking Mooj stooges around the USA willing to quote this and that Mooj source as fact. As the "thinking" goes, well, even if it the claim is something other than true, well, who cares - it serves the same desired "cause" - regime change in Iran. Fact is, it is counterproductive to such ends, on nationalist grounds, as few Iranians can stomach supporting an organization that served the ends of Saddam Hussein in his long war against Iran. (The Mooj are still based in Iraq - under de facto US encirclement, over objections from Iraqi leaders)
I know of no reputable INDEPENDENT scholarly observer of Iran who has EVER given credibility, at face value, to the claims emanating from the PMOI/MEK/Mooj.... Ervand Abrahamian is by the best scholar on the subject, yet there are others.
The US State Department has issued periodic reports on the Mooj - and for twelve years plus has been bold enough to call a spade a spade - and issue reports concluding that the PMOI is and remains a terrorist organization. Of course, Mooj defenders and certain neocon players have been claiming that its those State Department "liberals" at it again, and that their brand of the Mooj was merely for "political reasons" as they wanted to "appease" Iran.
Utter rubbish, to anybody with a clue about Iranian realities. Ex-Senator Torricelli (D-NJ) was forced to withdraw from his reelection campaign in part because he was exposed as a Mooj stooge - something less than politically correct after 9/11 and the presumed "war on terror." Other rising politicians, both Republican and Democrat, have also been tempted to take seriously Mooj claims. More seasoned hands know better.
Curiously, even some neocon figures are out now claiming that they "hate" the Mooj and their activities. Even (so-so)Rob Sobhani, the Pretender's (Shah) presumed foreign minister-in-waiting once warned of associations with the Mooj. (something some Monarchists have forgotten of late)
So what's the fuss? This book is a critical start to getting behind the standard propaganda waves behind the PMOI curtain. Yes, its a compelling personal story of Banisadr's political sojourn. I was a bit frustrated that his valuable analytical insights about the PMOI are often burried within long personal missives. I was particularly struck to read his account of the horrendous role of the female "handlers" within the PMOI. Here we had Banisadr acting as a key propagandist for the PMOI in foreign capitals, and yet his every movement, action, writing, and even his personal thinking was subject to "ideological" critiques by his "handlers."
In short, no thinking liberal or conservative (that includes you John Hughes) should be willing to quote any "fact" coming from the Mooj without careful checking and corroboration from sources separate from the Mooj. Banisadr's book, despite its minor flaws, provides a critical and moving eye-opener for anyone in the West contemplating how their own governments are being manipulated by ruthless expatriate pressure groups - in this case, vis-a-vis Iran.