Throwing stones toward ‘Satan’

All the way from Paris to Baghdad, I was thinking, “How can I write my report, How can I express my feelings and say where mentally, I am.” Either I have lost all my faith in the organization, or I was losing it very fast.

            Ideologically, I could feel not only my belief in God and Islam is not stronger than when I was not supporter of the Mojahedin, but daily I was losing any moral and belief I had on anything, including: ‘one should not lie or deceive others for his objectives.’

            Emotionally I was on the edge of collapse, I was going to surrender myself to my love for my wife and children, and forget my oath with my people, my country and my God. Operation of Forogh was an end for many of our Ideological, political and even moral believes and expectations. As a result of that operation, not only we retreat from our country, but we did from our beliefs, our objectives, our desires and hopes. This operation changed the meaning of many basic values. Life and death, Love and hate, Comfort and Pain, happiness and sadness. All were lost. Our smiles, our tears, our sigh, our anger, and our likes and dislikes all became meaningless.

            Politically none of our predication or analysis was coming close to reality. Once Abrishamchii said: “OK, we said downfall of the regime is in ‘short time’. It didn’t happen, so we extended the meaning of the ‘Short time’, and if it doesn’t occur, we extent it to as long as it takes and still we announce that we will overthrow the regime in ‘short time’, even if it takes hundred years. What else can we do? Can we live under Khomieni’s regime?.”

            At the beginning, I was on this impression that, this is only I, who has lost his faith and lives in hell. But more and more I could see and understand others around me with the same feelings. As meaningless and artificial were my smiles and show of happiness, so was theirs. We all were changed into actors playing for each other and encouraged by each other. This lie, this deceiving, reached to its climax, when our ‘ideological leader’ couldn’t accept and admit to his wrong prediction, judgement and failure. Not only in our propaganda, which could be understandable as could be used against us by our enemy. But even among us. Even in our high ranking meetings we had to praise him for achieving that victory. More than any body else, we were deceiving ourselves. I think when one can lie to himself and accept his own lie, is not so difficult to lie to others and persuade them to accept it as well!!

            Once we were told and learned, that believing in Mojahedin is based on two foundations. Their sacrifices for the people, and their honesty towards people. Clearly after Forogh we lost the last droops of our honesty and sincerity toward people and more than that toward our supporters and ourselves. So from then on the organisation’s foundation reduced into one, ‘Sacrifice’ and more ‘Sacrifice’. To believe in organisation more, we had to sacrifice more and accept that our leader has sacrificed more than any body else.

            Perhaps with sacrifices we could polish our rusted beliefs, and could gain some incentives for going forward. But were we able to gain support of people as before?! We were calling Khomieni, ‘DAJAL’, the one who deceive people at its highest. We were not calling him thief, or sex monster, or mercenary of foreigners. We could not deny the sacrifices of Khomieni’s supporters for him. So the main difference between them and us was the truthfulness and honesty. People believed in Khomieni, when he promised them democracy and respect for the rights of all individuals, and found new kind of dictatorship. Now even before reaching to power, they could see the contrast between our actions and our words. Our selfishness, which paralysed us to criticise ourselves. So how could we expect them to support us against the regime?!

            Plane was reaching Baghdad and I was thinking. “What can I write? What should I write?.” After all I could see my own weakness! How could I be sure that my judgement is not as a result of my own tendency toward ordinary life and return to my family? Was that the devil, wanting to stop me from my way in path of God?

            In Hajj we throw stones towards symbol of Satan; the same stones he received from Abraham when he was going to deceive him, not to sacrifice his son for God. Did I have to throw the same stones toward my own devil? I thought, I should. And I did. I wrote a detailed report about myself, criticising myself for weakness I felt and showed during my return to my family. The weaknesses that forced me to doubt the organisation, the leadership and my beliefs, my path toward people and God.

            Imam Zaman

            The first thing in Baghdad they told me to do was to watch the videotape of an Ideological meeting for ‘executive and high ranking members’, called: ‘Imam Zaman’ after the meeting. Meeting as usual start with a simple question. The question this time was: “to whom do we owe all our achievements, and whatever we have?” Question was simple and the answer to that shouldn’t be so difficult! Some said ‘God’, others, ‘People’, few went steps forward and said: ‘leadership’. All were wrong! Rajavi said “to answer you, I have to emphasis, whatever I am going to say is our final word in our Ideology, so whoever thinks is not able to stay in the organisation and fight till the end, should leave the room now; only those who are prepared to sacrifice everything can and should stay and listen to me.” This was the first time; he was saying these words, which were similar to Imam Hussein’s final words to his disciples. I felt, I was shaking; some sense of fear mixed with anxiety and curiosity was shaking me. I switched off the tape and start walking in the room, thinking, “am I worthy of seeing this tape? Do I stay with this ‘Imam Hussein’ of our time till the end?” I guess eventually my answer was ‘yes’. Without any intention, I start guessing what does he want to tell us? From the name of the meeting, I guessed he want to say, he, himself is the ‘Imam Zaman’. The promised one whom according to our beliefs is coming to save all human kind from the misery and . . . For me it was quite all-right, as I never could accept a man has lived for more than thousand years among us in different disguise, and is going to live for thousands years more. Yes it was quite acceptable for me to see Rajavi as Imam of our time (Zaman means time), rather than believing in that story. Contrary to my expectation, when I switched on the tape, he didn’t say anything new we didn’t know before. He said we owe everything to Imam Zaman and then he asked every body, why they didn’t name him as owner of all our belongings and glories?! From here he wanted to reach to his real objectives and conclusions. But I presume, as he didn’t receive any close answer from his disciples, he left the real discussion to another time, so the rest of the meeting was the same old stories about Imam Zaman.

            Few months prior to this meeting we had another Ideological discussions under the title of ‘Towhidi’ (Monotheism). I don’t think many understood him and his discussion by then either. Once while I was in Paris, we were called to a meeting with highest secrecy and security. Maryam by then was there for a medical check up and asked to see few of us, to discuss about that issue. I along few people under my responsibility were back from a political meeting in London. When she asked me about that issue. I didn’t have a clue what should I say. The only thing I could think of was to elaborate around the meaning of Towhidi. I said: “while this morning I was in London I could feel how stranger we are with that political meeting’s atmosphere, while on contrary, now when I am here with you, I feel a sense of unity with every body. Reaching to this feeling in the organisation was not possible if we could not reach to some sort of unification with you and Masoud as our leaders. To reach to the same feelings with the whole universe and people, I think we have to fly from where we are at the moment and find the same feeling with God, if we be able to feel unification with God, then we are able to feel unified with people and then we can claim we have reached to real ‘Towhidi’. She showed us her usual smile, which didn’t mean yes or no and start telling us her side of story. I don’t think any of us could understand her as her speech was not direct and blunt, and we were too tired and sleepy after our long day in London and then our travel to Paris. Later when I realised how wrong I was, I wrote to her that “my talking that day was like a monkey making face of a human.”

            The main problem of the organisation after ‘Forogh’ was the loss of moral and incentives of members. To overcome this, they found right spouse for almost all high-ranking members, especially those who had lost one. As a result atmosphere of the organisation was changed completely. Every then and on, with some excuses we had festivals, banquet, and celebrations. In all battalion those who had some talent in folklore dancing or could sing, or play theatre, were spending substantial time of theirs, to prepare themselves and others to show their talent to us. Apart from changing the atmosphere of the organisation, our Television could show those acts, first to fill the gap of inactivity of our army and then send a message to Iran that against Regime’s propaganda, we are there, more than ever prepared, ready and happy. Every Thursday families after few days’ separation were gathering together for having fun and dinner together and to be with each other for another day. Fridays all were gathering in sport grounds to support matches between different teams from different departments or battalions. So, apart from any celebration we had. Two days per week, Thursdays and Fridays we could be sure to have some fun. Organisation was spending some money to import some food and luxuries from abroad for easing the atmosphere of the organisation. We tried very hard to create some parks and greens around all battalion bases. As a result one could say the atmosphere of the organisation was more like a large happy family than anything else. Even most of our works were domestic for improving the living conditions of ourselves. So for sure our moral by then was almost revived.

            Having a ‘buffer’ was the reason of our failure in ‘Forogh’!

            The other problem of the leadership was member’s feeling of defeat and failure. Though they tried very hard with some successes to force us to accept ‘Forogh’ was a victory and not a failure. Still they were not able to change the fact that we wanted to go to Teheran and here we were in Baghdad. They benefited a lot from our political gains, to cover up the failure of military one, but still deep down, nobody could accept we won that operation. In our internal meetings especially the ones for high ranking members, most of the efforts of the high ranking commanders was to play as escape goat for Rajavi and put the blame of failure on themselves. The objective was to show that we could win and reach Teheran, if we were more united with our leader, as he was with Imam Zaman and God. This was the conclusion he wanted to obtain from last two ideological discussions. In ‘Towhidi’ discussion, opposite to what I said to Maryam in Paris. We had to reach to this conclusion, that Masoud prepared himself to sacrifice every thing he had, (means all of us), for God, as he had nothing else in his mind except what he was asked by God to do, perhaps as Abraham who was prepared to sacrifice his only son for God. On contrary as we were not united with him or in Towhidi state with him, we didn’t follow him without any doubt or reservation. As a result we didn’t follow his direction and couldn’t reach Tehran. In ‘Imam Zaman’ discussion too, we had to reach to this conclusion that there is no ‘buffer’ between him and Imam Zaman, while there is something obstructing us to see him and certainly Imam Zaman and God. If we were able to see our ‘Buffer’, our weakness. Then we could see why and how we failed in ‘Forogh’ and in other activities we have had by then. By then Masoud and Maryam had no doubt that our buffer, for all is our spouse, so they had to get rid of this ‘buffer’, at the same time, though they had been able by marrying them to revive moral of many high ranking members, but parallel to that they created many problems for majority of male members who could see the happiness of families in the organisation, and could not have their own spouse, as the number of women in the organisation was one third of male ones. Hence now it was necessary for the leadership to get rid of the issue of family and sex, for good.

            Maryam, masoul aval (first responsible of the organisation)

            Eighteenth of October 1989, we were called to attend especial meeting of ‘central committee’ of the organisation. This was the first meeting of us under this title. Many of us, including me, even didn’t know such a committee does exist and we are its member. So we were thinking and guessing what is going on and what is the news. The meeting was taking place in our base, close to residence of Rajavi, so many from ‘Ashraf base’ were coming there and it was good opportunity for us to see our old friends.

            As usual, when Rajavi wanted to shock us, asked us to stand up and start reading his hand-written verdict. What he read was not long, on contrary to his usual sermons; it was short and clear. He said: “… By the conclusion of the three stages of the ideological revolution, and in fifth year of this great transformation, which is the root of all our capabilities, whatever we have owned, and gained within our past few years’ struggle with the enemy of God and people . . . As ‘Ideological leader’ of Mojahedin and first responsible of the new Iranian Revolution, . . . I introduce ‘sister Maryam Rajavi’ as ‘masoul aval’, (first responsible) of the Mojahedin. The ‘revolutionary submission to her as ‘Masoul Aval’ of Mojahedin or deputy commander of NLA is ideological responsibility of all Mojahedin. Internal ideological revolution of Mojahedin as a result of this new position of Maryam is reaching to its highest and its most mature point, and is going to be source of new great benefits and blessings for the Mojahedin and their beloved people. Let all exploitation’s chains be broken and let smell of monotheistic society which is written in the heart and on the grave stone of every Mojahed be blown every where, to give the good news of freedom of all human kind . . . At this point I wish to be pardoned for all my failures and wrong doings during years that I was the ‘Masoul Aval’. Whatever was positive and looked strong point, were from the martyred founders of the Mojahedin, especially my great teacher, Hanif, and other martyred commanders and members of Mojahedin. But whatever was considered as negative or weak points were mine and are going to be mine and I accept all its responsibility. Let God Pardon me for all my year’s wrong doings, and cover up all my shortcomings with the help of clean soil of martyr’s graves, and wash my sins with their bloods . . .”

            After reading that written paper, he gave it to Maryam and with that an emblem of the organisation and start clapping, while Maryam was crying with pressing the emblem to her face. We all were clapping too, many were crying and showing their grief or happiness in different way possible.

            Many who were crying hard, especially many sisters, from last sentences of his message got this impression that he is admitting to his failures and is resigning from his post? I wish this was the case as it could revive the organisation and give new confidence to every body. But from first sentence of the message, I could see by doing this he has raised his position not only one step forward but perhaps as we could see later, thousand steps upward. Maryam in her speech neutralised any illusion existed in our minds about this matter. She said: “ . . . the only thing which let me to accept this great responsibility is the presence of Masoud as my ideological leader. Also this is because of necessity of placing Masoud in his especial and right position as the Ideological leadership of Mojahedin . . . “ After her speech and show of our hands as ‘affirmative vote’ for this nomination, we received some sweets and juice. Then as usual Masoud start asking us what did we think when we heard his message? Few said: “we thought you are going to leave the organisation . . . “ He asked them why did they think like that? While every thing was clear in the message?! He asked one of the sisters to go close to them on the stage. Then he asked her why she couldn’t see him and what did stop her to see him? Obviously she was not able to give right answer, and then he asked her husband to go there and stand between her and Masoud. Again Masoud asked her what did stop her to see him. Still she was not able to see the answer, even this act didn’t help her. While by now we could see clearly what he meant and every body start laughing while poor woman was astonished what is going on. In no way she could imagine that her husband was her ‘buffer’ to see her ideological leader. He repeats the same act again, this time for one of brothers. What we could not realise was that according to the rule of generalisation in the organisation this was problem of all of us and not just those few. Then few old members of the organisation admit their feeling against election of a woman as ‘masoul aval’ and criticised themselves. It was very emotional meeting, but still I could not see the significance of the meeting. Immediately after the meeting, while it was few hours pass midnight, few of us were asked to go to the room of Mohadessin, (masoul of our political department). In that meeting we were asked the same question. As my response, I referred to the leader of Tanzania, where he resigned from his post as head of the state to place himself as father of the nation. Then I said: “When Masoud was reading that, this idea passed from my mind.” I didn’t dare to say I felt he has placed himself in position of Khomieni, by distancing himself from executive work through choosing a masoul aval (similar to president in Iran, who has to do all the dirty job and accept all the blames for short comings, while the leader can rest in God like position far from any daily life’s problems and dirt). I was not asked to attend such a private meeting during next few weeks as everybody in that meeting were higher in rank than me. Perhaps the reason why they asked me to go to that meeting in first place, was due to my report from Paris which gave them this impression that I have recognised my ‘buffer’ namely love for Anna.

            In the next meeting for all members of our department. I was asked to explain my own buffer as by now we were told that all of us have a buffer and have to find it, In previous past few days I had thought about this matter a lot and my conclusion was that my buffer is my own selfishness. After all even between my dearest, my family from one hand and my own believe, on the other hand, I chose the latter one. So I was sure if any thing stands between me and my leader, certainly is not my family, but is perhaps my own mind, my own logic, believes and principals. Hence in that meeting, I said: “my buffer is my own selfishness.” With saying that, the whole meeting exploded in laugh, rejection, and even insults towards me. I was bewildered about what is going on as I was thinking that my buffer is worse than anybody else. After all those who had their spouse as their buffer could divorce them and reach to some kind of unity with the leadership. But what could I do to save myself? How could I divorce myself?! At the same time I was thinking that criticising ourselves because of selfishness is worse than being attached to our family. But obviously I was wrong and people in that meeting didn’t let me to say anything, to defend myself, after few speeches from different people I had to sit shamefully with this feeling that ideologically I am behind everybody else, not understanding what is going on. In the same meeting Mohadessin asked few people who previously were under my responsibility, when I was directing them in our European political work, if they are happier now or then. By then a sister, named Fahieme’a, who later became the most famous ideological revolutionary among us, had replaced me. Unfortunately for me the answer of majority of them was, then when they were under my responsibility. They argued that I was more expert in political system in Europe and knew what is going on so could understand their problem easier and could direct and help them better. This response of theirs was the start of new wave of attack toward I, as well as them, as between a masoul, politically expert and a masoul ideologically capable, they picked the first one.

            For the next few days after that meeting I was retired from my responsibilities to think and find my buffer. More I was thinking, less I could find the answer. While every body was talking about their spouse, I was not able to name Anna as my buffer, as after all, I was feeling that I have overcome the family temptation and rejected it and came back to the organisation. So I was searching in the clouds to find something to say and introduce as my own buffer. At the end I saw no way out, except cheating. When I read report of two of my under responsibilities, a brother and a sister, who were asking for divorce from their spouses and had introduced them as their buffer; I thought, to save myself from that misery, I have to write the same report. Before doing that I was called by my masoul and asked to go to Venezuela to represent NCR in a conference. As still my body was in a plaster and I was moving around carrying that heavy plaster, I asked him if they could send somebody else instead of me. He said they can’t and I am right person for this meeting. Then, as on my way, I had to stop in London to get my visa. I asked him, what should I do in London, as Anna will find out about my presence there and I have to see them? He said: “OK see them and be with them for a day or two, what is wrong with that?!” I could feel he is testing me, so I replied, “What about the ‘ideological revolution’?” He felt at the end I have recognised my buffer and asked me to wait till he give me the final answer. Then he went to Mohadessin and informed him about my revolution. Soon I was asked by Mohadessin to see him. He asked me how did I reach to that conclusion, I couldn’t lie and told him by reading the report of two of my under responsibilities. He said, “you had to reach to this conclusion by yourself, but still it is good and congratulation,” Then he asked my to give him my marriage ring. He told me, while I am in London, to avoid seeing Anna, instead of going to our house or our base, I can stay in a hotel.

            Mohadessin’s word of congratulation helped me a lot as during revolution era, this word was symbol of acceptance of the ‘revolution’. It gave me self-confidence and self-assurance. So I got rid of that plaster and prepared the documents we needed to have in Caracas. In Caracas another member under my responsibility joined me, as his revolution was accepted too, we both were very active. As a result apart from official meeting with chairman of Venezuela’s parliament, and members of their government, we could pass a very strong resolution in support of our resistance in that Conference and paved our way for gaining some material support from some European trade unions as well. In our way back to Baghdad we were asked to stop in Paris and talk with people there about new Ideological revolution. It was an honour for me to talk about the revolution, especially as still we were tasting the sweet part of it, and didn’t have any clue about the bitter part. In few days time we received another message to go to Malta and represent our movement in an annual conference of European Christian-Democrat parties. I believe in Malta we were very successful too, as we could have official meetings with president of Malta, Prime minister and foreign minister of Malta, and Luxembourg, foreign minister of Norway, … and could gain official invitation for visiting few countries.

‘Maryam’s ideology’.

            As a result of our achievements in Venezuela and Malta, Two members under my responsibility and I were feeling that we have gained something to offer as a sign of our ‘revolution’. As we were told that after the revolution one has to show, he or she is capable of doing things, hundred times more effective than before the ‘revolution’. But against all our expectations, in Baghdad, we found out, nobody cared about our activities or our achievements, even a book, present of Venezuelan president of parliament for Rajavi didn’t impress any body. The atmosphere of our base was changed completely, rarely any body was prepared to talk to anybody else, smile was rare commodity, which could not be found easily. Most of the times people in our department wanted to be alone and think, and when they could not find any empty room, were walking outside of buildings. Nobody was doing any political work, question and reports of our people in Europe and America, were left there unanswered. Departmental work was at its minimum, only news of different radios were monitored and instead of thick news bulletin of every day, very tiny one was going to be produced. Even in refectory in lunchtime nobody was prepared to stay long and talk or laugh as before. As matter of fact many were preferring to come to lunch as late as possible and leave the hall as soon as possible to avoid any conversion. Once I found one of the member has locked himself in a room and is not prepared to come out. Eventually when he did, I found him with red eyes as red as blood, because of tears he had alone. Well every body was in the process of the new phase of the ‘ideological revolution’. The only legitimate talking was about the revolution and exchange of experiences in that area. Apart from that nothing was important, as there was no outside world. We were astonished, why members there, are so much deep in misery?! What is going on?! What is wrong with them?! Why can’t they have their revolution, and set themselves free from all those pains?! We didn’t know that recognising our buffer is the first stage of this long process, and only has to be considered as tip of the mountain, which was going to come. The next stage was the ‘ideological divorce’ of the buffer, which by now was clear for every body that is their spouse. Poor singles had to divorce as well, not knowing whom should they divorce. Later we learned that they have to divorce all those women, which they felt they love in their mind. One day we were asked to take our personal belonging to move to Ashraf base for attending Ideological meetings with the leadership.

            Still I could not see any reason for misery. Even for myself, I was thinking that the divorce is the only solution, for my relation with Anna. It could save her and children from the state they were in. She was young and could marry again and have the sort of life she was looking and hopping for, children too, they could have more stable life, as I could see no end to my situation. Soon I realised this is not only a legal divorce the organisation is looking for, but emotional or as it was called the Ideological one. We had to divorce our spouse in our heart and further more to hate them, as they were buffer standing between us and our leader for long time.

            In the meeting, Rajavi announced that as our ‘ideological leader’ he has issued the divorce of all of us from our spouses. He asked all to hand over our rings, to our masouls if we have not done so by then.

            That meeting which was carried on for almost a week, was the strangest, the most horrible organisational meeting I had attended by then. Still I could not say exactly if it took several days or weeks or months. As during those days we could not have any sense of time. If I say time and space were becoming meaning less for us, I haven’t exaggerated. The atmosphere of the meeting from the first second was showing us how different this meeting is with others. Though there were few hundred members present in that meeting, one could rarely hear any noise except those who were talking with Rajavi or when he or Maryam were giving speech, or talking to us. Every now and then, we were getting shocked with loud cry of somebody in the meeting as sign of her or his revolution and after that, their talk with the leadership mixed with tear and cry. There was no individual talking, no kind word or happy smile among us. The only thing, which could let us to fly from that atmosphere was the tea brake, when we were receiving tea and some sweets. Though we were not hungry or greedy, but those tea and those sweets were very delicious as were helping us to move our mind from what was happening there and return to the world of reality. On the board behind Maryam all our names were written in red and close to them few names in green. Those who were in process of the revolution, their name were in red and those who had their revolution, in green. At the start it was up to any individual to volunteer for the revolution, but by the end of the meeting, it was changing into a compulsory situation. Maryam was reading names of five by five of those who had not revolted yet and were in final stages of doing so, to go to the stage and have their revolution. Whoever was having his or her revolution had to stand up, and say what has she or he learned or found out about herself or himself. At this point everybody else was free to ask any question from those who were having their revolution, accuse them, criticise them, and even insult them in any way they wished. In this meeting rank of people was not important any more, all were equal except those whose name were written in green as it meant now they are real Mojahed. We were told till the start of this stage of the revolution, the organisation has had no real ‘ideological member’ except Maryam, as she was the only one who could recognise and understand the real ‘ideological position’ of Masoud. ‘She was the only one who paid something as price of being a Mojahed. The rest of us were receiver, not paying anything ideologically valuable for keeping ourselves as a member of Mojahedin’. We were told, in first stage of the revolution we were only audience of what was happening. While Masoud and Maryam were receiving all accusations and sufferings, we were watching them, and even we used to be praised by people as we were considered being the victims of their selfishness, and their whim. Now it was our turn to pay the price of being a Mojahed and keeping ourselves as a Mojahed.

            To understand Mojahedin’s ideology, or ‘monotheistic ideology’ (Towhidi), we had to realise that, there exist only two different ideologies in the world. One, which is based on discrimination among people, according to their class orientation, or their race, their religion, or their sex. Opposite to that is the ideology, which doesn’t recognise any difference among people except those who are prepared to sacrifice more for God and people. As by now in many cultures, discriminations based on class or race or belief is abolished, the anti-Monotheistic ideology at this juncture has been materialised in its most basic and fundamental and also primitive form, in shape of discrimination based on gender. Hence this anti-God, anti-people, anti-evolution, ideology should be called the ideology of sexuality. The opposition to the ‘ideology of Towhidi’.

            One by one of us had to reach to this conclusion that by then we were not among believers of Mojahedin’s ideology and as other people, everywhere in the world, were deep sank in the ideology of ‘sexuality’. To be able to realise this, first we had to divorce or sexuality. The first step in that direction was to forget about sex for the rest of our life. Hence we had to divorce and hate our spouse, as our love was based ‘on sex’, surrendering us to the ideology of sexuality and holding us to understand the ideology of Mojahedin.

            Apart from this basic idea and steps we had to take to understand it, the rest of story and lectures were materials supposed helping us to move forward.

            In one stage Maryam draw detail maps of two ideology, their points of contrast, and basic values in each one of them. By now the opposite Ideology was called sometimes as ideology of sexuality or as a symbol of that, it was called Khomieni’s ideology. For example the meaning of ‘sin’ in each ideology: In Khomieni one is any thing related to sex, such as adultery, or sodomy, which could not be forgiven in any way. It has the harshest punishments, death by stoning, and even after death, by staying in hell forever. While in Mojahedin ones, the greatest sin is to become hopeless from mercy of God. We realised there are seven great sin in ideology of Mojahedin, which cannot be forgiven: 1- Dualism, or Blasphemy. 2- Running from ‘Jihad’ (fighting for God). 3- Killing a person who hasn’t done anything wrong. 4- Witchcraft and sorcery, which was defined in modern language as deceiving people at its highest point. 5- Usury or exploitation. 6- Stealing from an Orphan, which was defined as stealing from treasury of a nation. 7- Accusing a pure and clean woman for adultery.

            Apart from sins, many other things were defined in two ideologies. For example status of women, while in our organisation women can reach to the highest position, as Masoul aval. In Khomieni’s ideology they are denied from their basic rights. God of Khomieni is a God of hatred, God of hell. While our God is God of mercy and compassion. They have ‘Valley Faqih’ which rule over people, while we have ‘Ideological Leader’ who is trying to save us and direct us in evolution path. They get their incentives from hate while we are encouraged by love for people. Their emotions and affections are only for their immediate family, while we have a very big heart, which can place love for all humanity in itself. They will gain their incentives from ‘receiving’, while we gain it d by ‘giving’. Their complexes create their character, while ours is made of our beliefs. They live in their grave, as all the time they are thinking about death and after death and how they can avoid going to hell. While we are alive, we think about life and what can we do for others . . .

            We were told that, our fight with Khomieni’s regime, unlike our fight against Shah, is not only a political one, but Ideological one. This is a fight between two Ideologies, which have stood against each other in the whole history. Like Moses who stood against pharaohs and slavery. Or Jesus who stood against those who were worshipping wealth and power. And Mohammed who fought against worshipers of woods and stones, those who believed in discrimination between different tribes. To be able to fight against Khomieni’s ideology, we have to purify ourselves from his Ideology. To do that we have to get help from Masoud, but we have problem, as we cannot see him as he is, and cannot reach him where he is. So we have to get help from Maryam to understand Masoud. We cannot do so unless we accept her as first responsible of the organisation not in form but ideologically. To do that we have to answer this simple question why is she Masoul Aval? If we answer this question Ideologically and correctly, then we have reached to the point where we can get help from her to understand Masoud. Understand his love for God and People and his hate for Khomieni and his regime, and then we are able to fight against the regime with the same incentives and same hatred and stamina and courage, as Masoud. In this way we are going to fight against that ideology and its symbol Khomieni till last drop of our blood and with last cell of our body.

            At this point Masoud told us, “to be able to see and understand, one has to sacrifice something, to understand more, you have to sacrifice more. To understand an ideological concept, you have to sacrifice the most valuable things you have. Abraham to reach understanding of God, had to sacrifice his son the most precious thing he had. And Marry had to sacrifice her chastity. What is more valuable than anything else for you? Is it your wealth? Well at the moment you are poorest and have nothing to call it valuable. Even if you had something in the past. You have given it to the organisation long time ago. Is it your life and your health? Again answer is no. As many simple supporters of the Mojahedin proved they are capable of sacrificing their life and their health. And after Forogh you all proved that you have passed that stage. So what is most valuable thing for you at this juncture? Yes that is your love for your spouse, alive or death, seen or unseen. Although some of you are not married, still you have somebody in your mind and in your heart. You have to give up that love. But how? By understanding why Maryam is Masoul Aval. As you can see this is a bite complicated but at the same time for those who are able to see things with their heart, and not with their mind, it is very simple and obvious. To understand Maryam you have to divorce ideologically your spouse. Vice versa to be able to do that, you have to understand Maryam. More or less is like problem of Chicken and egg. Which one first? The answer is, none of them, as you cannot solve this problem with logic of your mind but with understanding of your heart. After all which logic tells Abraham to sacrifice his beloved son. Or Mary to trust an unknown person as angel of God to surrender herself to him. To understand Maryam you have to prepare yourselves to give up everything. Our slogan from now on will be ‘either everything or nothing’. To stay as a freedom fighter either you are going to give up everything you have, or leave the struggle and give nothing. Either you will have your ‘ideological revolution’ or you leave the organisation and become a simple supporter of the Mojahedin. You have to leave your sexuality grave, and born again, this time not from your biological mother but from your ideological mother, Maryam. Then you can fly with her and reach to the sky of Monotheism. To understand Maryam, you should fight with her with all your might, with all weapons you have from your present ideology that has many things in common with Khomieni’s ideology. You should accuse her as people accused Mary. You should insult her as many insulted Mohammed. And you should doubt her, as followers of Moses did. After all these fights you should be judge of yourselves, who was the winner of the fight? Your ideology or Maryam’s.”

            Then it was Maryam turn to give her sermon. She said: “Many of you think you have understood Masoud and have accepted him as your leader. But I am telling that you are wrong. Your relation with him either is emotional or logical or both but not ideological. Normally sister’s relations are emotional one and brother’s one logical one. You have seen him in many difficult situations and have seen him how he has been able to solve many political problems. So logically or politically or even emotionally you cannot find any body more capable than him for being your leader. So you think you have understood him ideologically. Not understanding him, you have changed into an ordinary man and woman, without any serious frontier with Khomieni’s ideology. Till understanding him ideologically, you haven’t chosen the struggle seriously, and still are thinking about your ordinary life and ordinary needs. To keep you in the struggle, up to now Masoud has done and paid every thing. You all have been the receiver, but from now on you have to pay as well. You have to learn to be a giver not a receiver. Even sisters who naturally are giver, were not giving any thing to him or organisation but to their husbands.”

            Then she gave us a long lecture about a subject under title of ‘signature for sins’. Which its essence was that we have to understand that, the era of having a sinless leader as our prophets or Imams has passed and human kind has reached to the era that people have to choose their leader from among themselves. We have to understand Masoud as our leader and accept him as one. When we answered all our doubts and questions about him, then we have to give the signature of sin to him. Means we have to accept all his sins, except leaving the struggle against Khomieni. In another word after accepting him as our leader we should not doubt him any more and have to give him the right of deciding right from wrong for us. Giving him priority in thinking and decision making over us, in all maters of life, even in our own private life. From then on our relation with every body and everything should not be like the relation of two individuals with each other, but it has to be like a triangle. In another word our relation with any body and any thing has to pass from our leader. For example our love for our supporters and our people is because they are supporting Masoud and they are people who are going to be led by Masoud. Our country because that is Masoud’s country and from there he can materialise his Monotheism society. … After understanding this concept, no other love can play as barrier between our leader and us, hence from then on we can love any body except those who oppose him, which we have to hate them. We learned departing from this triangle of love and hate is like killing our leader or selling him. At this point Masoud in Jesus like manner, said: “Do everything but don’t kill me or sell Me.” Then again Maryam continued her talking by drawing a line on the board as ‘Fraction line’, on numerator she wrote: ‘Masoul Aval’, and in denominator wrote ‘signature for sins’. At this point she said: “Now every body has to pass from this fraction.” She meant: every body has to accept and understand Maryam as Masoul aval and Masoud as ‘ideological leader’ with new definition. From then on that was called in simple term as ‘fraction’, ‘numerator’, and ‘denominator’, or first and second articles of the new stage of the ‘ideological revolution. Accordingly, the question from any body was if they have passed from them or not and why and how. Masoud said, “whoever who revolt and change into a Mojahed, his or her bones and flesh are for Maryam and his heart and souls are mine. You have to be frank with Maryam, not hiding anything from her, no lie, no holding of any contradictions from her. She should be your closest person, the one who can be trusted more than any one in any thing. And I have to have priority in your heart, soul and mind over you yourself; my place should be deep down in your heart. This is going to be your ideological relations with us, your leadership. This will make you united with us. In our ideology whoever who has taken the ‘fraction’ more seriously and is more bound to it, is closer to us and is higher in rank. This is completely opposite to Khomieni, where those who believed in him more than any body else, were those who were furthest from him in rank, simple revolutionary guards mostly young children, walking on mine fields for him.”

            We were told any ideology creates some sort of protective or defensive shield around us to protect us from attack of other ideologies. To get rid of our old ideology, perhaps the Khomieni one, this shield had to be broken. Then after finding our new ideology, which later was called ‘ideology of Maryam’ we are going to find new protective shield to protect us from other ones. To break our old ‘protecting shield’ there were many helping hands around us in the meeting room and later in more private meetings that we had. Teasing, insulting, abusing, dishonouring us for different reason in different occasions were helps, each one of us before our revolution were getting from every where, especially from our old masouls such as sister Tahereh, or old members of the organisation especially Abrishamchii, and in many occasions from Masoud himself. Many women who had strong femininity were attacked and teased some how because of that, and many men because of their male-superior feelings. When it was some body’s turn to talk about himself, he was going to be like a prey among many dogs all barking at him. Poor prey in many occasions had no choice except sitting with eyes full of tears.

            In first few days many of us, members from political section were sitting besides each other, soon we realised we are the best target for all those who had their revolution. Almost all of them could find at least something in any one of us to tease him, and after that all attention was going to be directed against us, and then it was others turn to get ‘helping hand’ from this or that member. I was sitting beside one of the members from United States, he was rather hand some, to tease his male sexuality, he was called by Masoud as ‘Alien Dillon’, thanks to him, immediately I became Masoud’s prey as well. He called me ‘yoghurt’, as I had no revolutionary roughness and was like yoghurt soft with every body. Many to tease me, were not calling me as usual, by my first name which was similar to Rajavi, but with my family name, to remind me my tie with ‘Banisadr’ and his Ideology.

            Everyday after having in average twelve hours meeting with Masoud and Maryam, we were going to have our private meeting for another five or six hours, with the head of our section, Mohadessin So rarely we had much time for eating or sleeping or thinking privately to see what should we do. Apart from mental pressure, after first few days, I was under immense physical pressure too. As a result of taking my plaster off and having high activities in Venezuela and Malta, my back problem was worse than ever, and now with sitting every day up to seventeen hours without any proper rest, back pain was killing me. By now it was moved from my back to my legs and feet, which could not be killed even with strongest painkillers. Hardly I could walk and when I was walking for going to have lunch or for bathrooms, which were far from the place where we were sleeping, I was walking like lame person, and it was getting worse day. Fortunately mental pressure and pain were as much as I was not able to feel much my physical pain. By then I became believer of those who were saying mental torture is the worst kind of tortures in prison. Against all advice we were receiving not to think but feel, I was trying hard to solve my dilemma with my mind. More I was thinking less I was getting any result. Some times I was trying to cheat, by copying other people’s experiences for describing my emotions and feelings. But more often not only it was difficult, but was impossible. Many to describe their feelings for the leadership were calling their spouse as ‘monster’ and ‘demon’ and saying to return to them is like eating some body’s ‘dry vomiting’ or sleeping with rotten death in the same bed. They were explaining how much they hate their spouse, as they see for long time they have been separated from love of our dear leader because of their petty material love. However hard I was trying, I could not accept and see Anna as the root of my ‘ideological separation’ from the leadership. So unlike many I was not able by creating hate produce love for the leadership. By now I was trying to hide myself among people as much as I could, by sitting among those who were not from our section or didn’t know me personally, somewhere in the back raw. So could be save from teasing, especially from Masoud himself.

Love instead of hate.

            At last, one day I could overcome my fear. Perhaps I let my protective shell be broken. This time I let myself not to think what others are saying or doing and start thinking about Maryam and what I thought of her. I forgot about Anna and finding some kind of hate for her, and start thinking about love. I remembered deep down in my heart when I heard news of marriage of Maryam with Masoud, I felt love has no value in the organisation, so for any reason it can be sold or be forgotten. I accused Maryam of not knowing the meaning of love; love for her husband or for her child. But what was the meaning of love? Did I love any body?

            While others were talking and arguing about a poor person’s revolution, who was explaining himself, I was thinking, and thinking. He failed, as only few could persuade every body in first round that they have had successful revolution. Still I was thinking, now I had something serious to think about, something equally important for myself. What is love and whom did I love and what did I do for them? I start remembering those I loved most around myself, I remembered my mother and her love for myself. What was it? How could I define it? The only thing I could remember was that she was always ‘giving’. Yes her character could be explained as a ‘giving person’. Could I explain Love as ‘giving’? Yes I could, and I did. I start remembering my mother and start crying for her, the cry I never had for fear of being labelled as one who is attached to his mother. Now I was free to cry, to do anything and say anything, as I was not afraid of losing anything any more. Suddenly I heard Masoud who was talking about Fahieme’a, the sister who replaced me in my job in the department. The only thing I was remembering about her was her smile. She was smiling to any problem and any difficult situation. Once when I was in Swiss, she came to our base with few of people under her responsibility, by then we were in the same rank, I remember while she was to busy with her people and her work, but could still was able to think about us who had a conference next day and had no time to prepare food for ourselves. She did her job and start cooking for us and soon we were surprised by her kindness. Now Masoud was asking if any one has anything against her. No body had anything against her. By then I didn’t know, but her revolution was recognised as the first among all sisters and as a result later she was named the deputy of ‘Masoul Aval’. For the first time I showed my hand to talk against somebody. I didn’t have any intention to say anything against her, but wanted to say what did I think when in our department’s meeting Mohadessin asked people about her, who had replaced me in my job. It was so strange, among all those people; I was showing my hand as opposition toward her revolution. Suddenly Masoud saw my hand and said. “Silence, Silence. A very dead man, deep down from his grave, wants to talk.” By then they used to say those who have not had their revolution are living in their grave. Masoud asked me to talk. I explained what passed from my mind when I heard she has replaced me in my job. As She had neither experience nor any proper education to replace me in a job which needed some basic ability. Then unexpectedly I start crying as I remembered her kind face, her smile, her care for others, and especially when I thought she has been asked not to divorce her husband legally who was not in the organisation but divorce him Ideologically. “How could she? How painful it is going to be for her? To be with somebody as wife, but not being permitted to love him.” More I was thinking, more I was crying, crying for her pain and suffering. I felt this kind of marriage for her should be more like prostitution than ordinary marriage. She had a child as well, again she was not permitted to leave her child, but at the same time had to stop loving her as before.

            No body was expecting to see me crying like that not even myself, especially for somebody else. Then Masoud stopped me and asked me about my revolution. I said: “I didn’t want to talk about my revolution, still I am fighting with Maryam.” He asked me about my fight? I said: “I accused her of not knowing the meaning of love, love for her child and love for her husband. Sacrificing her emotions for the organisation. Later I felt no woman is capable of real love as long time ago my own spouse left me easily while before that, she used to claim she loves me very much. (Referring to Anna after accident we had, when she left me for another guy) So I presume I differentiate men from women by saying that men are more capable of long lasting love than women. which in my view is symbol of humanity” He asked me how do I define Love? I said: “I think love is giving.” Then again unintentionally I start crying, He asked me, why am I crying? I said: “When I define love like this, I can see myself. I feel I have not given anything to any body, I cannot name any giving in whole my life, while when I think of her, or Fahieme’a, I can see they are all ‘giving’. Then everything changes for me completely. I see women more capable of love than men; I see my mother and other women around me who were all the time giving and we men all the time were receiving. Then I feel who am I to judge them.” Then I start talking more and more about love; while few hours before then I was not able to talk for few seconds in front of those people. Now I could feel, I am able to talk for hours. At last I had been able to find my own source of energy and incentives, I could feed on love and get incentive from love. By then Maryam as symbol and main source of love changed into my Gods. Masoud stopped me and said: “Wait, Wait, Is this the same yoghurt Masoud we knew? Is he the same person lying in his grave? It seems he has changed into a philosopher?! He is giving us a lecture and new definition for love? I think he has had his revolution.” He asked Maryam the same thing? Now she start talking with me and asked me about ‘denominator of fraction’, Normally she was asking about denominator, which in reply we had to talk about Masoud and Masoud was asking us about numerator, which meant we had to talk about Maryam. She asked me: what do I think about Masoud’s sins. Here instead of using the word of ‘accepting’ all his sins, I said: “I forgive all his sins.” At this time both of them were jumped from their chair as ‘forgiving any body’ was not for us but for them or for God. I soon realised my mistake and start explaining myself by saying: “Before I became member of the organisation, I was considering all members of the Mojahedin as ‘sinless’. Not only Masoud but all of them, I never could see and feel their sins as compare to me they were and are purest and cleanest people in the world, so how could I see their sin?! Yes I accept his sins as mine, as he is the purest person known by me.” Still Maryam had some doubt about my revolution and ‘signature for sins’, but Masoud stopped her and wrote my name in green on the board and asked Maryam to say congratulation to me, which she did. I was so lucky, without claiming anything, or being attacked by anybody, I had my revolution.

            After that meeting I couldn’t attend nightly meetings any more as every day I was having a painkiller injection and organisation’s doctor asked my masoul to stop me from attending those meetings. Soon as I was not able to walk any more I was moved to another base and doctors asked the organisation to move me as quickly as possible to abroad for having back operation.

Living among clouds.

            When we reached to Paris for operation, I almost had lost all feelings in my legs, and with last action to help me to pass the urine, I lost it totally. By then I could not feel anything from waist downward. The same night I was moved to the operating room and had my operation.

            The first person, next to doctors whom I saw after gaining conscience was Dr. Saleh Rajavi, a very capable physician, another Masoud’s brother. He was as usual very kind and welcomed me with his smile, and said “you must be very dear for Masoud and Maryam, as they personally called me few times and asked me to do every thing to help you to be cured as good as new.” Then he asked me, how did I bare the pain till that stage, and why did I ask for the operation as late as that? I replied: “be honest most of the time I could not feel the pain, as I was in heaven with angels.” Then without realising the situation and presence of others, I start talking about Maryam and what have I seen in her.

            I think by all different accounts, I was right, In normal situation, in no-way, I was able to bare that amount of pain during all those days. The only time I could see and feel the pain was after the end of daily meetings when I had to walk from meeting Salon, to our room, or dinning hall. Before the operation, I could see, that I am going to be paralysed, but it was not very important for me. I could feel that I have gained something that works for me many times more than any feet or legs. Even after the operation, though part of my legs and feet were numb and some how paralysed, and I had lost ability of controlling my urine, still my concern was not what had happened to me or is happening. My mind was in the meeting room and I was with Maryam. I could feel that I have found something lost for many years, new reason, new incentive, new direction, not only for the resistance against the regime, but even for life and existence. Yes I could feel I have the answer for many of my old questions. “Why am I alive and why should I be alive.” Love was something, which pushed me into politic and forced me to forget everything else. But for many years was lost among waves of hate. During previous years, our entire mind, our work and our word, were directed, and concentrated towards what the regime was doing and finding new reasons to hate them more. As a result, we had no time to think about ourselves and what do we want instead. I was attracted to Mojahedin, not because of hate for Shah or Khomieni but because of love for what they were saying and their promises for the future. For love of people, to see them happy, to see them healthy, and without any hunger, to see an end to injustice, end of exploitation, end of misery.

            Now Maryam had new message for me, ‘love’. Even hate had new meaning, hate not because of hate, but hate because of ‘love’. We were not hating the regime because of our losses, because of our suffering, because of our tortures in the prisons, because of loss of our families and friends or not having a happy ordinary family life. But because the regime did stand against our love for people and what we wanted to give them. Because of betrayal of people. Promises they gave and forgot and denied and later act against them. Because of rise of injustice, because of increase in numbers of poor, because of those children who were bought and sold in Iranian cities as their families could not support them. Because of those poor women and men who were going to be stoned in Iranian cities with charge of Adultery or Sodomy. Because of return of our country to middle ages, implementing the most barbaric, ancient Arabic traditions.

            During all those days stronger than any morphine or painkiller was Maryam’s smile and word of ‘love’. By now I had found something, which, while was not new, but in a sense it was new in different dimension. Years before when I had LSD for the first and the last time, I saw and felt something which was new and completely moving. I learned how forgetting oneself, and thinking about others one could forget pains and miseries. I always was thinking that was the effect of narcotic, and can last only for few minutes or hours as long as narcotic has its effects on our mind. But now I could see that Maryam has down the same thing, without having any narcotic, I had the same feelings. But this time not for few hours but for life. I could feel as long as I have Maryam and her ideology, I can live in that condition. In ‘pain free zone’. I could feel, see, and hear word by words, which she said in the meeting. I could see how miserable I was as long as I was thinking about myself and saving myself from my personal pains. While, when I forgot about them, suddenly I changed into a happy and free person. Now after understanding Maryam and finding the answer for personal happiness and freedom, I was anxious, not anxious, I have to find stronger word to explain it, I was dying to feed every body with this magic medicine, to save them from all their misery. I was thinking if our people in Iran were feed by this medicine, what is going to happen, yes we could explode; we could jump to the point, which nobody could imagine it. I was not able to hold and hide my happiness. I don’t know what other patients in the hospital could think of me, seeing me smiling and sometimes laughing loudly with myself.

            Next day I received a phone call. Strangely it was Masoud’s voice. I was going to jump from my bed from happiness. He asked me how am I and if I need anything. Then he gave the phone to Maryam and I could talk to her. Both knew my feelings and could feel me. She said you have to be cured soon and return; we have a lot of work that has to be down. I told her I am cured already, when I heard your first word, what should I do, tell me to move the earth and I do it. She starts laughing loudly and said, “No we don’t want to move the earth, but want to free our people.” Then told me: “Look you have had your revolution and understandably cannot feel pain and problems which you are facing at the moment, but you are more useful for us walking on your feet rather than being pushed on wheel-chair. So from now on your responsibility is to get your health back as soon as possible.”

A theory as a present.

            For a month I was in the hospital, through exercise and medical help, I could gain part of my health back, and asked to return to Baghdad as soon as possible. During my stay I wrote many report about myself and my feelings, but more than any thing I thought I have to do something for Maryam, The only thing which I could think of was to work on my old theory about how our mind works and what are connections between feelings, and thinking and . . .

            It was something, which always used to make my mind very busy since my study in Iran. It was concept of consciences and life. With four dimensions like time or space, which we knew, we could define all lifeless objects around ourselves completely and differentiate them from each other. But it was not the same for alive beings. So I set a theory and called life as fifth dimension. A phenomenon, which could not be defined by previous four known dimensions. Now I had to find an instrument for measurement of this so-called fifth dimension, and find its shared characteristic with the previous ones. And a mathematical base for this theory. In my view the main characteristic of life was thinking in its most general form, which could be seen in simplest form of life. A thought or incentive of a single cell which wants to be alive as an individual and wants to reproduce, till the most progressive and complex form of it as thought of human beings. To begin with, I forgot about the rest of beings and concentrated my work on the most progressive known form of life. I could feel and see that there is some kind of mathematical relationship between ‘life ‘, ‘thought’, ‘feelings’ and ‘emotions’. And I wanted to find this relation. I could see, as much as we think about something we find as much feeling for that thing and if some how there is a sharp increase or decrease in our feelings in one direction, suddenly we find emotions, anger, sadness, happiness . . . then with assistance of will power we show those emotions to those around us.

            With some initial assumptions I set a mathematical model to relate these phenomena, ‘life’, ‘thought’, ‘feelings’, ‘emotions’, and will power to each other. As there was some kind of relationship between different emotions and feelings this simple mathematical model became more and more complex. When I was in university in Iran, I showed my work to one of my lecturer. He looked at my equations and asked me two questions. One mathematical question and another a philosophical one. How do I intend to solve this high degree of differential equations and if I want to define the whole beings with these five dimensions, how do I intend to define God in mathematical form? With benefit of set theory, I answered his latter question but I didn’t have any answer for the former one. During my study in university of reading, I learned how differential equations could be solved numerically. When I finished my MSc. course my supervisor suggested me to continue my study in this subject, which was my interest as well. I had an interview with one of the lecturer of Imperial college and he showed interest in supervising me for PhD course which unfortunately because of financial problem, I couldn’t accept that offer and I had to go to Newcastle university for continuation of my study.

            During my organisational life, I had to forget this personal hobby too as it was considered as waste of time and eventually in 1983 when we had to burn all our writing materials, I burned all my work in this subject along my stories, my academic works, etc.

            Now while I was in hospital I start remembering all those ideas again, and wrote everything including many mathematical theorem and equations. I sent it to Maryam as a present. With a letter. In that letter I wrote her: “. A poet can write a poem to describe his feelings for you and what you have given us. A painter can draw a painting, and a musician, can write a piece of music. I am neither of them, but I know a little about mathematics and want to explain my feelings and my thought for you and your revolution in this way. You told us that Ideological leader is at the point of conjunction of mind with heart, when mind thinks what heart feels, and vice versa. This is why I want to show you that, there is no contradiction between logic, thought, science and understanding with our feeling for you and your revolution. I wish you accept it as an unworthy gift of mine . . . “

Another ‘deals’, this time on the issue of ‘human rights’.

            During those days, again all our members in Europe and America were in hunger strike. The reason this time was the trip to Iran of Mr. Reynaldo Galindo Pohl, the United Nations Special Representative on the situation of human rights in Iran. For almost eight years United Nations was asking Iranian regime to let him to visit Iran to give a report about the situation of human rights in Iran, but they were refusing to invite him to go there. But now after some negotiations, in the wave of improving their relation with the west, Iranian regime had accepted to let him to visit the country and give the report about the situation. After American deal with regime on hostages which was called ‘Iran-Contra’ affair and French ones which ended in expulsion of our members to Gabon. We were sensing new deal between the west and the regime on the issue of hostages, which was the main political concern of many western countries at the time. In many western countries there was election time and as usual ruling parties wanted to achieve something in this area to help them to win the elections. On the other hand, Iranian regime after the end of the war, not having any more excuses for the miserable situation people were in, had to improve the devastated situation of economy, build destroyed cities and villages, find job for hundreds of thousands unemployed revolutionary guards and soldiers leaving war fronts. Hence to solve these problems they had to get help from the west and could see the main obstacle is world’s attitude toward situation of human rights in Iran. At the time, violation of human rights in Iran was an alarming signal for merchants, capitalist, and bankers, it could imply that the regime is not a stable. Hence their capital might not be safe in Iran. As a result, Iranian regime was prepared to exchange hostages for the issue of human right. To achieve this, they had to get a good report from the representative of the United Nations. As we succeed in neutralising French deal with the hunger strike, we were thinking that we would be able to do the same thing this time too. While the situation was completely different and even if few of our members were going to die because of strike, we could not do any thing about outcome of Pohl’s trip to Iran. In French situation we were facing with a single government, with opposition inside and outside of the country. A government with obvious wrongdoing and an open deal. So our cause for everybody was legitimate and we had strong allies in Politic, Media and among people. While in this case we were not able to prove existence of any deal, we were not facing any government, but a poor man representing United Nation. As matter of fact we had to show happy face as supposedly one of our wishes written in all United Nations resolutions and in many of our own communiqués was taking place. ‘Permission of Iranian regime for trip of Pohl to Iran’. It was so funny to listen to our own radio those days, while we were worried so much about that trip, and its outcome and knew how beneficial it is going to be for the regime. We had to announce messages of congratulation in our radio for surrender of the regime to our wish. Obviously in our propaganda toward Iran we were provoking the ‘hard-line’ faction of the regime against ‘Pragmatic’ one. We were giving them a tool to stand against ‘Moderate’ by arguing: “how can this trip be good for us and our enemy (i.e. Mojahedin) at the same time.” Perhaps the funniest part of the story was the repeat of our propaganda for Iran in our news bulletins for our supporters out side of the country. Poor supporters didn’t know and understand why should they go to hunger strike for celebration of a victory!?

            Parallel to our supporter’s hunger strike, our political department was mobilised to do everything, to stop publication of any report favourable to the regime. Several different documents containing many reports about mass graves and hidden prisons in Iran, names and particulars of prisoner, and torturer, was published and was handed to the representative. We even for the first time gave him names of some of our political prisoners; those whom we were sure are not going to betray us. We asked the representative to see them when he is in Iran. Also we asked our supporters to write letters to him and ask him to give report about their beloved ones killed or put in prison in Iran. In this way we made sure that the representative has received apart from our documentation, thousands of individual letters, which could not be ignored easily. In my return to Baghdad, there was no time for talking about the revolution and my feelings. Even when I talked with new masoul of our department who was my old masoul ‘sister Tahereh’? I found out that my report to Maryam was not welcomed and was considered as some sort of ‘show off’. I was told that in this revolution we have to realise we are empty handed without the leadership and have to get every thing from them, not from our personal ability or personal talent. The expression was that we have to walk on their feet not ours. So it seemed against all their expectations from my revolution and how noble and rare they thought it had been, they found out still I am receiving my incentives from within and not without.

            Any way, I had to return back to the reality and leave the sky for the angels. Every body in our department was running and working hard to neutralise what was going to happen. After all, the issue of human rights was the only legitimate toll, which we had against the regime in our political activities and for our arm resistance. Without that issue, we could not legitimise our resistance and we were going to be named as another ‘terrorist organisation’. Every day we were monitoring the representative’s activities in Iran and were issuing different related communiqués about it to neutralise any deal. Eventually few weeks after his return from Iran we received the copy of his report. After reading it, I received a phone call from Masoud; He asked me what do I think about the report. I told him more than ninety percent of the report is in the advantage of the regime. Even in those parts, which have some reference to the violation of human rights, there is no mention about us. He asked me to write a statement about it, which could be issued when the report is coming out officially. And later, to write a book about it.

            Luckily I found few obvious contradictions in the report, especially in conclusion sections, few misinformation and clear mistakes. So I wrote a statement, which was showing clearly that, the report has no value and has written intentionally to help the regime. So, when the report came out, our statement was published at the same time. Rajavi in his statement called it a ‘shameful report for white washing bloody hands of Mullahs.’ and add that this report is part of ‘a dirty new deal with the regime’. Our statement and especially contradictions were so strong, which the representative had to admit there has been some mistakes in the report, but denied strongly existence of any deal. In his press conference, in response to questions of many reporters he said angrily: “My report has noting to do with hostages, this is absolutely wrong and lie.”

            By then I was transferred to newly established department called the secretary of the organisation, under the responsibility of Mohadessin, ‘our so called shadow foreign minister and spokesman’. By then I was told, I should write a book in answer to that report of Galindo Pohl from Iran. In my view Pohl in his report for any reason, deal or no deal, followed several clear lines, optimistically for getting permission to visit the country again and help for improving the Human rights condition gradually, or pessimistically as it was described by us then, as part of a deal with the regime for freeing the western hostages held in Lebanon. Firstly he wanted to show that violations which has occurred in Iran are from past and had happened as a result of the up and downs of the first few years of the revolution, many of them were due to the wrong doings of junior officials. Secondly, documents of violations mainly produced by the Mojahedin are not valuable and have many mistakes. Thirdly and the most important one of them: claiming that Mojahedin are a terrorist organisation and have killed and tortured many people including their own members. Hence if any of them has been executed, is because of their terrorist activities, which is punishable in any country. I answered first and second arguments without any problem as there were enough documents to show that all officials of the Iranian regime had approved all those crimes and some personally were involved in executions and tortures. To prove our documents are not reliable, fortunately regime had picked few cases, which were announced killed by their own media, and we claimed them with the reference to those media, including official announcements from Iranian radio. Hence even if those people were alive, it was not our mistake but another trick of the regime. After neutralising the regime’s claim, I wrote: “After all we never claimed all our documents are correct, as matter of fact it is almost impossible in Iranian situation one produce documents without any mistake, but we are very happy for any mistake, as it could imply that one of our brothers or sisters against our expectation is not death but alive. This is the duty of the representative to answer back for correctness or wrong of any individual case. If not for all of them, at least, for many thousands of them, whom their executions were officially announced by the regime.”

            My main problem was the third argument, ‘Allegations against us, especially allegation of terrorism’. From the beginning I had problem with Mohadessin on this issue, as I wanted to concentrate more and more on this issue and elaborate about it. While he wanted a brief and quick book against the representative. At last I could work, perhaps not as much as I wanted but as far as I could, on third issue and could add few chapters related to that one. Firstly I argued that it was not part of the representative’s mandate to investigate or say anything about this subject and if it was, he had to listen and write, what we had to say in response to them. Secondly according to the definition of the ‘Terrorism’, none of the facts mentioned in the report have been proved that have been acts of terrorism. Thirdly and most importantly, “it is for sometimes that our fight with the regime is on the basis of the laws and conditions of regular warfare, which fortunately is admitted by the regime as well by producing certain documents for the representative, mentioned in his report.” I claimed and then asked what has he done to save prisoners of war captured and claimed by the regime: I wrote: “The special Representative could also have realised that the Geneva Convention of August 12, 1949, applies to the Mojahedin’s military forces . . . He could have cited these internationally recognised rules to save the lives of numerous POWs from definite death . . . “ Then I add another chapter to prove why we had no choice except implying arm resistance against the regime. And if because of arm resistance one want to say we are terrorists, they have to call American freedom fighters in their revolution and those who resisted against fascists in Italy and Hitler in Germany should be called terrorists too.

Assassination of a great person.

            That year we had our weakest resolution in the commission of human rights of the United Nations ever. I think by now it was hard liners turn, within the regime to do something to neutralise ‘pragmatist’s success’. One day we all were shocked by the news of assassination of Dr. Kazam Rajavi, near his house, in Geneva. When I heard the news, I was so shocked that part of my forehead swallowed immediately; it happened just once, and it was then. I liked him very much, for several years we were working together and were going to different conferences. I think what ever I learned in politic was from him; he was my teacher in this subject. Though never while he was alive his help to us and improvement of our image in international scene was appreciated and recognised, after his death he was praised by everybody and even was called by Maryam as a ‘Mojahed’, which I think was his wish, while he was alive.

            Dr., his sister Monyra’h and her husband Asghar who used to live in Newcastle during the Iranian revolution were all killed by the regime just as revenge against Rajavi. None of them, even according to the norms of the Regime’s ‘justice’ had done anything to be punishable by death. Perhaps this was the reason which death of each one of them hurt me even more than death of my close friends, as death for us was part of our life accepted and expected, while for them was just because of their family ties with Rajavi. I was not asked to attend his funeral, perhaps because of my back problem which I have to admit my masoul was very thought full of that. But personally I didn’t want to attend it, as I knew it is going to be fully formal for the benefit of the cameras. I cried alone in my room and later, once when I was in Karbela I could be alone with him for minutes and say things, which I had in my heart.

            After his assassination, I add another chapter to the book about aftermath of the report. A blank check, which that report gave to the regime for its terrorists activities. As whatever was written in that book was part of things, which I learned from Dr., I suggested that it be named after him, which was accepted by Rajavi. I think Dr.’s assassination and perhaps logic of that book had the greatest effect on the representative as his next report was completely opposite to the pervious one and was mostly in favour of us. When a year later I had a meeting with him, he kissed me and said, “Should we forget the past, past is past yes?” I said: “yes but we paid our highest price with blood of one of our dearest.” He sighed and said: “yes you are right, but what can one do?” By then it was announced by Swiss authorities that thirteen people with Iranian diplomatic passports were responsible for his assassination. From then on all of the representative’s reports had a section dedicated to the case of Dr.’s assassination and question from the regime concerning that act.

            Learning more about ‘logic’ and ‘analysing methods’ of Masoud.

            Our main responsibilities in our new department, called ‘the secretary office of the organisation’ were to research and giving proper advice and analysis to our political departments including Diplomacy and media departments. We were supposed to direct them in their activities and actions. After the Ideological revolution, I was more courage full and more often was able to stand against things I felt were wrong. When I was writing the book as answer to Galindo Pohl’s report, which was called ‘Human Rights Betrayed’, I was under pressure from my masoul to write it in the same manner with the same language as other organisational books. With many accusations mostly petty ones without any proper or logical proof. For example, he was asking me to mention that his interpreter was related to Abrahamian, who is an Iranian-American scholar, recently had written a book about the Mojahedin which the organisation didn’t like it at all, and was accusing him as being mercenary of the Regime. They wanted to say that she got a present, a carpet from the regime to work in favour of them. In my view, even if our accusation was true, which we could not prove it easily, was not very important as we were claiming that Regime had deal with Governments and perhaps with the United Nations. On the other hand, giving present was and is very common in the politic, and in no way is equal to bribe. If we say whoever who has received a present is at service of the one who has given the present, by then there were many high ranking people in politic, all at our service. I resisted and didn’t write that point and avoid to use the common language of the organisation as much as I could and didn’t accuse him to anything which I could not have any logical proof for that. At the same time Faried, mastermind of our propaganda in our media was writing a book as an answer to Abrahamian’s book about the organisation, later it was published under the name of one of the ‘organisations’ member of the NCR. I never did like that book and felt it had many mistakes and petty accusations without proper proof. Nobody asked my view about that book and I read it when it was published and was distributed, but I think if I was asked before it’s publishing I had enough courage to show my disagreement toward it.

            Though by then, I was showing my disagreements without any hesitations or reservations, soon I learned about my limits. Once I was called to go and see Masoud, when I was with him, he showed me the letter of condolence of the deputy Secretary General of the United Nations toward himself, and asked me about my view and how should we respond to it. I gave my view. Then he asked me to write the responding letter, which, he was going to dictate it to me. When I was writing whatever he was dictating, I noticed some part of it is not proper and contradictory to the intentions of the sender of the letter. I stopped writing and gave him my view. He didn’t say anything and pretended that he has not heard me at all, after few seconds’ silence, start dictating me in the same line as before. I felt very ashamed and learned that in front of him one has to talk when he has asked to, otherwise whatever he says is not welcomed. Later the same letter that obviously was a private letter, against my opposition, was published in our publications and inflicted some damages in our relation with the United Nations office in Geneva. I learned, I have the same limitations in our own department too, and not any arguments or views are welcomed. Later I learned all political departments have their aims, directions and lines, chosen and dictated by the Rajavi himself, nobody could say anything in opposition to those lines but could say anything parallel to them or in favour of them or for speeding them.

            Apart from Mohadessin, the head of our department who was my masoul and I, who both of us were from diplomatic department, the rest of people in our new department’s council, were from the Media department, responsible for our Radio and Television and our publications. Every day we had a meeting discussing news and analysing them. Among those present in those meetings, I was mostly like schoolboy sitting beside university professors. All of them old members of the organisation, close associates of Rajavi. Though I was feeling that I have to learn a lot from them to be able to say anything from my own mind. Soon I found I could see something is wrong in their logic, and in analysing the events. I had to admit, they were very sharp in recognising important and decisive news from unimportant ones, much sharper than me. But in analysing, there were some shortcomings, which while I was there, either couldn’t formalise it or didn’t dare to say anything about it, as it was the same logic used by Rajavi himself and I believe all were his students in this subject. For example when they wanted to predict what is going to happen as a result of an event, soon they were drawing, as they used to say different ‘Tableau’, meant writing different alternatives which could, and rejecting one by one of them, reaching to the ‘most probable one’. There were two problems in this kind of logic, firstly the numbers of alternatives always were limited, while in reality we were facing cases, which were not among our alternatives. For example when they were discussing about contradictions existed between different factions within the regime always cases, were either this faction will get rid of the other one or vice versa. While in reality we could see neither of them happens and they start working with each other or suddenly another faction was coming into surface. Most of the times these kind of analysis and predictions, were announced in our media and were going to be repeated in our political meetings. Predictions like Ahmed son of Khomieni is going to be in charge after Khomieni’s death or Hard-liners will wipe out the moderates within the regime . . . About war and peace between Iran and Iraq, after any minor news and conflict, they were drawing cases, which always were limited to two or three alternatives. Either regime is going to attack Iraq, or Iraq will start the war, or their conflict reaches to the point that Iraq does not mind if we cross the border toward Iran. While in all those years neither of this cases occurred. The main problem in this kind of reasoning apart from unrealistic limitation in different alternatives was that every body was free to argue against the cases not favourable to us, but rarely any body had any incentives or courage to say anything against the favourite one. As a result always our prediction was that our favourite case is going to happen and unfortunately most of the time many departments were going to be mobilised for facing that prediction. Hence many times a lot of energy and money was going to be wasted for wrong prediction.

            Another problem in our arguments mostly with devastated affects on the organisation were Masoud’s simple examples for explaining things. Usually in his examples and his analysis all complexity of the real problems could be forgotten very easily, hence the favourite conclusions could be achieved and everything else was going to be directed accordingly. Worse than of all, was the comparing Iranian politics with ‘magnetic field’ with two poles. In this kind of analysing all Iranian politician and later all world’s politician either were in negative pole, with the regime, or in positive pole with us. As a result we lost many friends between Iranian and foreigners who perhaps had some reservations about our analysis or in supporting us vehemently, or perhaps they could not see the regime as total black as we were projecting it.

Devastating results of the ‘ideological revolution’.

            While still I was very in love of Maryam’s messages in her revolution, I could see some of its destructive effects on people around myself. Mehdi, one of our top army commanders, now retired in our section, as could not have his ideological revolution; he didn’t have any knowledge to do anything in our department. I was feeling very much pity for him; rarely anybody was talking to him as nobody in those days was prepared to show any sympathy towards those who didn’t have their revolution. He was walking alone, sitting alone, always with sad face, or dead smile. He was on the edge of losing his mind. Or perhaps he did and we didn’t notice it?! By then, in many departments, there were few people in the same situation as Mehdi.

            Situation of some of the married couple was worse than others; couples, with one of them not having his or her revolution while the other side had one. Organisation’s order for these couples was that they have to live with each other. But the partner who had his or her revolution had to be careful not to have any love or affection for his or her spouse. One of them a sister who was under my responsibility, many days was crying and all the time was miserable, once she told me without love, she feels she is prostitute living with her husband. Most of the people who could not have their revolution were send to different department far from where they were working, to avoid their embarrassment, but in any department soon they could be recognised and were becoming like people with leprosy, nobody prepared to talk to them or show any sympathy toward them. These people had two alternatives, either leave the organisation, which for some high ranking members like Mehdi was impossible or do their best, or even pretend that they have had their revolution or are trying to do so. Husband of the sister under my responsibility, eventually left the organisation and after long struggle, that family was transferred to France. I don’t know exactly why, but later I heard she killed herself when they were living in Belgium.

            In the beginning only high ranking members had to have revolution, but later it was decided that all members should have it and in few months time they said all combatants of the army have to have their revolution, other wise, they are not able to fight against the regime when it comes. Hence compulsory meetings of the revolution with presence of Masoud and Maryam were taking place in Ashraf fort every day. Compare to the Ideological revolution every thing else was secondary. There was no real work anywhere, except in the kitchens of the bases. For us who had our revolution, attending these meetings was optional, while we were strongly advised to attend them, saying that revolution never end and always there is danger of return of us to anti-revolutionary situation. I rarely was able to attend those meetings, as my back was not permitting me to sit for long time or travel from one base to another one. Though my revolution was accepted, I knew deep down, I only had understood and accepted the numerator, means Maryam side of the revolution. I don’t think accepting and understanding this side of the revolution ever was very difficult for me, but I don’t think I ever could accept the Denominator, means accepting Masoud as Ideological leader. To put him first in my mind and my soul, prior to my conscience, my logic and believes and my moral and my principals. I think I tried very hard, and I did my best to change myself to what they were expecting me to be. But I couldn’t and perhaps this is the main reason why I am where I am and I am writing these words. Fortunately during those days as Masoud’s position for long was accepted by everybody, not many people had problem about him and ‘accepting his sins’. Almost all who were not able to have the revolution had problem in accepting Maryam as masoul aval or divorcing their spouses. So rarely anybody was noticing my problem or teasing me where my problem lied. Organisation’s epidemic as usual was ‘generalisation’ especially those days, so rarely anybody was considering somebody as especial case and usually all were beaten with the same stick. So even if anybody wanted to tease me about my revolution, and ask me for progress of it, still, they were asking about issue of accepting Maryam or our women masouls.

            I was trying very hard to overcome my illness and attend ideological meetings to learn and understand about my weakness and solve my problem. Once when I was in one of those meetings, I saw few members who were under my responsibility in the past, almost all of them wanted to talk to me and get advice about their revolution. As it was common those days, I tried to help them as much as I could. One of them in the past very close to me, asked about my personal feeling about that fiasco, which I told him happily. Then I felt he does want to tell me his feeling, which I could be sure they were not in favour of the Revolution. I stopped him and told him, “Look whatever I told you, from my feelings, good or bad, should be reported to your masoul by you. And I don’t mind, as this is the rule of the organisation. But let me warn you as a friend not to tell me anything, which you don’t want any body knows about it, as I am obliged to do the same thing.” He stopped talking, but I felt with that comment of mine, a friendship died immediately. This was the first time which I felt the hurting side of the revolution. Up to then whenever I was seeing miserable people in the middle of their revolution, I was not feeling pity for them as could see those are signs of pains before long-lasting happiness waiting for them.

            Against all goods I used to feel that has been achieved due to the ideological revolution, now and then I could see the dark side of it. Once in one of the meetings, a member originally from United States, in his explaining his revolution, claimed he understood Masoud’s position in 1985, and accepted his ‘ideological leadership’ by then. Well for me there was nothing strange or wrong in this claim. Perhaps even he had to be praised for his understanding and his love for Masoud. But against my expectation, suddenly many, especially sisters were burst into anger. All their hands went up to talk. And later they start insulting and swearing at him without having permission to talk. Masoud and Maryam tried to stop sisters’ anger and show of hatred, by saying that, he has described himself wrongly, let him to talk and explain himself more. But when he talked again, he repeats almost the same thing. This time for the first time, I saw the anger of Masoud. He stood up from his seat, insulting the poor guy, crying with anger. Suddenly few brothers who by now realised what is going on, jumped from their seat toward him to beat him or perhaps if they could kill him. Maryam stood up as well and start calming down Masoud, by saying “please you should not make yourself angry, let us to handle it.” Then she starts stopping those men to beat the guy, and asked others to take him out of the meeting room. After he left the room, Masoud who was still very angry, asked who is his masoul and why has he been brought into that meeting. Then there were long speeches from different people against that guy. By now I was realising what was going on. He with his claim that he had realised Masoud’s ideological position by 1985, had put himself in the same status as Maryam, as it was said, up to 1989, and new stage of the revolution, no body except Maryam could realise Masoud’s position. Only those who accept Maryam’s position can get help from her to start understanding Masoud. Poor guy lost his ranks and for several months had no responsibility, worse punishment in the organisation, and then sent abroad to work as a sympathiser.

            During those days to prove their revolution many sisters were asked if they are prepared to marry and love the ugliest and the most bad tempered man on the earth, if the organisation asks them. This was one of the ways they could prove that they have divorced their husbands ideologically, and there is no more bound between them and their spouse. Men were not asked this question as it was claimed that their love for their wives is just for sex and can love any women, how ever ugly, or with bad behaviour, as long as they could have sex with them. I heard in another meeting, which I was not present, another poor guy not knowing how he can prove his revolution, copied from sisters instead of brothers and claimed he is prepared to marry any body, organisation asks too. Then while every body was laughing to him for his foolishness, he went one step forward and said, “I think, to show my revolution I have to marry Maryam.” This was like having a suicide. As again all start showing their anger, including Masoud and if he was not saved by Maryam perhaps could be killed in the meeting. Some times during that era, I could feel those with personal problem in the revolution are showing more aggressive behaviour toward others to prove their own revolution, their attacks against others which was encouraged by the organisation, was the main reason of anxiety and misery of many during those era ended in some successful and unsuccessful suicides of people under attack.

            High ranking members who couldn’t have the revolution, were not allowed to leave the organisation so in some cases they had no alternative except killing themselves. While they were living among us, they were forbidden to do anything, even helping in the kitchen was denied to them. Perhaps for somebody, who has not been in the Mojahedin and don’t know them, this punishment doesn’t look very harsh. But one has to consider that whoever was with us was for doing something, our work, our job was our being, our personality, our reason for existence, so if we were not feeling useful it was worse than being dead. Especially among people who were not free for a second and always were moving and working. Once we were called to Masoud’s office. By now I was told my rank is ‘M’, the deputy of executive committee member. The only people who were in that meeting were those who were either like me ‘M’ or ‘HE’, executive committee members. In that meeting Masoud asked one of the guys present to tell us his news. He told us: “Nasser one of our army commanders has killed himself with a blade given to him for shaving” Apparently he was one of those who couldn’t have ‘revolution’, and was for several weeks in the state were he had to do nothing except thinking and writing. The person who was in this situation was called ‘Bangalli’, it meant that he or she has to live in bungalow, do nothing, only think and write report, once few years later for few days I was in this situation and could feel the pressure that exist on a person in this situation. I felt suffering any kind of physical torture is easier than suffering of being called ‘Bangalli’ in the organisation. He told us when he took some food for Nasser to his Bungalow, found him sank in his blood. Masoud was very angry. He asked us what should he do? And told Maryam, “I think we have to stop the ‘Ideological Revolution’. Apparently these people don’t want it?!” Then he starts looking at us and said: “I suggest to all of you to take your spouse back and go to your home, we should carry on our struggle as we used to. You are not worthy of the Maryam’s revolution.” Then he asked the one who was giving us the news, what have they done? He said: “we told Iraqis and their coroner physician came and saw him and wrote report of his death” He asked him where did they bury him? He said: “some where, we could not bury him close to our martyrs.” Then Masoud told us: “do whatever you want to do, but not suicide, it is worse than anything else, is not even like killing somebody. With suicide you are killing our ideology, our belief. …” Then Maryam in response to his earlier question said: “this is nothing to do to the revolution, anybody doesn’t want the revolution is free to go. We have to carry on as we cannot overthrow the regime without the Ideological revolution and if we leave that, it is better to forget about the overthrow of the regime as well.” In another case Mussa, whose rank was M as well, to escape from the Organisation pretend after an accident has lost his mental balance, and after was transferred to France for medical treatment escaped from the organisation.

            Later in another meeting I heard from Rajavi that Eshagh who was working with me in New York has gone to dry hunger strike because his revolution has not been accepted, few years later, after I left the organisation, I heard he hanged himself about the same time, but we were not told then, so I presume there were some more suicides which we didn’t hear about them.

Every body has to prepare himself for the ‘crucifixion’.

            While we were deep sunk in our ‘ideological revolution’, on