My personal Substack
Live Last read · last published · next check
El debate sobre la oposición iraní es demasiado importante para quedar condicionado por etiquetas heredadas, fuentes selectivas o la repetición de narrativas que Teherán ha utilizado durante mucho tiempo para desacreditar a sus opositores organizados.
The debate on Iran’s opposition is too important to be shaped by inherited labels, selective sourcing, or the repetition of narratives long used by Tehran to discredit its organised opponents.
Michael Rubin’s latest column (@AEI, March 2, 2026), alleging that the main Iranian opposition, the Mujahedin-e Khalq (PMOI/
The Middle East Forum article “Mujahedin-e Khalq Lies About Attacking Khamenei’s Compound Erode Its Credibility” (Feb.
Michael Rubin’s latest tirade, “Iran Turns to Iraqi Militias to Save its Revolution (Washington Examiner, January 14, 2026),” doesn’t just recycle debunked propaganda about the alleged role of the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK) in suppressing Iraqi Kurds and Shiites—it escalates into something far more sinister.
Is Michael Rubin auditioning to be Iran’s unofficial envoy in Washington?
For more than four decades, the Iranian people’s struggle for freedom has played out not just in the streets, but also in the contested arena of international discourse.
As the Iranian regime shows signs of profound instability following the recent regional conflict and serious discussions regarding regime change gain momentum, The New York Times—with a discernible pattern of intervention—has predictably rushed to its aid.
Michael Rubin’s rush to judgment in his latest tirade against the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) and the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) is not only premature—it is riddled with contradictions, historical omissions, and political and ideological bias.
Michael Rubin’s fixation on dehumanizing Iran’s largest opposition, Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), serves only one master: the theocracy in Tehran.
Here we go again!
Iranians Demand Halt in Executions, Blacklisting of the IRGC, and Accountability for Regime Leaders
As the Iranian regime reels from the fallout of its disastrous parliamentary “elections” in March, Michael Rubin emerges once again as its faithful apologist, wielding his pen as a cudgel against the very opposition, the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), which most
The recent venomous diatribe unleashed by The Intercept against the Mujahedin-e Khalq (PMOI/MEK), the foremost opposition force and the vanguard of Iran's pro-democracy movement, transcends mere journalistic malpractice – it represents an egregious assault on the very principles of human decency and ethical journalism.
The recent nationwide uprising in Iran is a testament to the people's desire for fundamental change and the establishment of a secular, democratic, republic.
Michael Rubin has parroted oft-refuted Iranian regime’s propaganda at the expense of intellectual growth.
Shortly after a dissident Iranian group, “Ghyamsarnegoni, (Rise to Overthrow),” penetrated the computer servers of the Iranian regime's presidency, acquiring an abundance of classified documents and inflicting a severe blow upon the mullahs, Michael Rubin has once again come to the regime's rescue by bashing Iran’s principal opposition group, Mujahedin-e Khalq (
Michael Rubin, a self-described "academic" with a penchant for spurious claims, is now peddling a new bizarre and incredible theory: that the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), Iran's leading democratic opposition, is more reviled than the odious Iranian regime itself.
The bumbling thief stumbled upon the haystack
After recurring embarrassing failures, a desperate Michael Rubin is still scraping the bottom of the mullahs' oil barrel when it comes to attacking the main Iranian opposition Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK).
