Old fart talking through his ass again.

1. (i) Iran like ALL countries is multi-racial, with maybe 40-50 million of its 75 million people being actually Iranian, and the rest a mixture of Semitic Arab, with Ural-Altaic Uighur elements (Turk/Mongols).

India is also a very multi-racial country containing about 150--200 million Iranian types of people predominantly in the North and West; Dravidic type of people basically every where and finally Indo-Burmese/Indo-Tibetan people in Assam, West Bengal, Bihar, Sikkim, Arunchal Pradesh, Kashmir, Uttrachal, Mizoram, Nagaland, Tripura and Manipur....predominantly in the very North near Tibet, and the general North East of the country.

I am waiting for research by notable organizations in India to be done into the racial linkages between IRAN and INDIA.........Kith and Kin nations in one sense, and India as the largest depository of Iranian people, even without being an official Iranian majority country. Iranian tribes migrated into India about 3500 years ago and they've been coming into India ever since, usually always loosing their original Iranian identity.......except for a few...Parsee's from 1300 years back, the Irani's from 150 years back, and of course the Iranic Pashtuns who have settled in India in significant numbers for the last 800 years.

I subscribe my self, at least spiritually as a Pashtun (in the non-religious sense) whose ancestors settled in Bengal over a period of 800 years. My younger better days and demeanor now, should also subscribe to this fact.

(ii) The cultural exchange between the two nations has existed for at least 4000 years if not more, when records did not exist. At a cultural, and at many other levels the two nations have developed strong bonds which last to this day, which though may not be officially recognized, but exist.

(iii) India requires huge amounts of oil and gas, the annual bill of which cost $85 billion in 2009??? It is thus natural that to meet this future anticipated demand soaring each year that Iran should be a natural country to turn to for the supply of such a vital commodity, as a near neighbor country. The mullahs are difficult to do business with, this is accepted. Their business practices are opaque and difficult. Mullah run Iran runs an odd economy, where nothing is transparent exporting $75 billion worth of oil and $15 billion worth of non-oil commodities in 2009, with a mere $45 billion imports. The mullahs one day will go, but the importance of Iran as a source of strategic energy will remain for India.

(iv) Afghanistan is the time honored spring board for the eventual invasion of India.......my Metric--level history lessons told me this, and not any top secret file that fell into my lap from London. Lets see, various Iranian invasions, Greek, White Hun's, Turkic and Mughal.

There are anticipated to be 300,000 Western and mercenary troops in Afghanistan "busy fighting" 10,000 Taliban. The Taliban is run by the ISI, which in turn is funded and run by the USA...again metric level information from open sources, and not based on top secret files. India for the sake of history obviously must be wary of such a presence, by an occupation military from the other side of the world which intends to be in Afghanistan, according to the British Defense secretary for 50 odd years or more.

THIS HAS OBVIOUS IMPLICATIONS FOR INDIA.....even for slow ponderous...hare om shanti, hari om shanti India. We must learn from history so that it does not repeat itself in the horrific manner of the East India Company scenario which consumed the lives of 30 million people, and left India impoverished, destitute, and divided.

Pakistan is being Balkanised and destroyed by the USA with the intriguingly cooperative assistance of the Pakistan military in full day light view.
THIS TOO HAS OBVIOUS IMPLICATIONS FOR INDIA. Someone some day will sit down with me and explain to me what the clever Punjabis in the Pakistani "strategic depth" military are actually doing.

Sugary sweet nothings being whispered by the USA into India's ear does not change the facts that the USA's trade with China is worth $400 billion (heavily favoring China...China exports to USA $340 Billion) and that Communist China was fast-tracked into the UNSC permanent veto position in Noo Yawk, whilst being under Mao's rabid rule with the Cultural Revolution and threats to all in-sundry BACK in the 1960's.

Mean while according to the USA, India's UNSC permanent veto seat will have to wait years and years under a vague notion of Security Council Reforms whenever (join the queue bud), with a paltry in comparison to China's trade with the USA of $40 billion. China is at present India's biggest trading partner doing two way trade worth $60 billion.

Obama in his recent visit to India did not change these parameters of fundamental relationships between the two nations, but indulged in grandiose PR, speaking Hindi in Parliament, and the usual oratory flowery prose that he dishes out to the American people.

ManMohan Singh's enthusiasm apart, a person who may well be an American agent recruited in the 1980's, the fact remains that America by arming Pakistan surreptitiously yet again, and destabilizing the country, AND WITHOUT MAKING FULL serious commitments to India save for the recent nuclear agreement which won't fundamentally impact for a good many years, thus constitutes a strategic threat to India, via Pakistan and China. And with its presence in Afghanistan. Flowery oratory does not change these facts. India must strategically prepare for this American challenge at least in South Asia

In that holistic sense, one sees the value of Iran (Persia) to India in the long term, as both nations face a common threat of an expansionist Imperialist USA seeking Permanent low intensity war in Third World nations. Granted the mullahs are awkward people to deal with, but the importance of Iran to India must not be under estimated.

2. Is India Zionist run state, as the old fart stated recently?

Kashmir is strategically important for India. The loss of Kashmir will have severe problems for India for a variety of reasons of which we don't need to go into. India has been tardy and weak in defending Kashmir, and has subsequently lost large parts of the country to other countries.

We may safely conclude that India is not an aggressive militarist power, which celebrates expansionist military adventures at the expense of its own peoples Human Rights and personal Liberties. The Indian military does not play a central role in Indian society, unlike Pakistan. It does have a 1.2 million colonial era police force, but that is a separate matter.

Given the strategic nature of Kashmir India necessarily has to maintain large numbers of combat troops in the state, 800,000 is a reasonable number given the overall strategic security scenario. However we also know that military people are not very civilian friendly and we can recount the tales of American bases in South Korea and Japan to highlight this fact. Soldiers are trained to fight. Even in modern countries such as the UK with the Northern Ireland trouble, between 1970---1990's where 3500 died (a sophisticated first world country, with the rule of law blah blah).......most of the deaths were the result of British security action, directly and indirectly.

Kashmir under Indian control is not all Muslim; there are significant Hindu, Sikh and Buddhist communities which also exist in Kashmir. Not all Muslims in Kashmir want to separate from India. Many are happy to be part of India with its great opportunities and booming promising future, unlike failed state troubled Pakistan. Some Kashmiri Muslims are Shia, and they see what the Pakistani army influenced by Deobandi and Wahabi elements have done to Shia Muslims in Baltitstan, and Gilgit from the late 1980's, when the Afghan Mujaheddin had won their victory against the Soviets, AND what they are doing to Shia's in Kurram province now.

Perhaps the Supreme Leader would like to comment on these very real crimes by the Pakistan military against Shia's in Gilgit and Kurram province?

To be sure there are many flaws in the Indian administration of Kashmir. 50,000....80,000 people have died since 1989 in that province. BUT it still has got be better than being part of Pakistan. The Indian government seems to be genuinely addressing the issues of Human Rights abuse in Kashmir. And as with the Pot calling the kettle black Iran's position on Human Rights GLOBALLY, hardly qualifies it as a beacon of light and hope which should be busy lecturing other nations about their Human Rights record.

Indian Kashmir has been part of India for 63 years, and between 1947--1989 it was a very peaceful place. Only after 1989, when the Pakistan/American backed Mujaheddin in Afghanistan had won, did the Pakistani/American switch some of these fighters into the Indian Kashmir theater from 1989. The present human rights condition dates back to provocative Pakistani action, using Wahhabi fundies and the subsequent Indian reaction to that in its own territory.

Does the abuse of Indian security against Muslim Kashmiris make India automatically a Zionist state?

Well of course not. Around the world in South America, Africa, Asia and even in Europe various ethnic groups are fighting from separations from their country. I wouldn't ascribe all of them in terms of Zionist conspiracy. The struggle of accommodating the various needs of large and small multi-ethnic nations, and the response of the security forces in those nations is on-going in many countries including Iran, in Iranian Kurdistan, and Sistan/Iranian Baluchistan.

India does have friendly relations with Israel, and this relationships has developed further since the early 1990's. There is extensive military cooperation in the field of weapons with India, and the arms trade between the two nations is quite extensive (billions of $) . Israel for instance helped India iron out problems with her new Arjun tank (project on-going for 38 years)....and sadly Israeli security experts have been called into Kashmir to advise on how to deal with Kashmiri insurgents.

There is also intelligence sharing between the two nations, and both nations trained and armed the Tamil Tigers together. The terrorism in Mumbai could well have been an operation involving elements of security from both countries and the USA (Headley---Jewish). Powerful Jewish communities once resided in India, refereed to as the Cochin Jews, Bene-Israel in and near Mumbai and Baghdadi Jews in the East of the country, and obviously before their mass flight to Israel, they exercised their community power to make India a pro-Israel country. India has launched Israeli military satellites recently which may be used against Iran.

However having said this in the overall scheme of things Israel is a "busy body" country that cultivates relations with many countries, either directly or through the services of the USA ("Hello this is the USA...oh yes also meet my good friend Israel")..........with Singapore, whose security enjoys very close relations with Israel, Taiwan, ALL European countries, North America, South America, Australia, Africa.....and so forth. In that sense India's relationship with Israel is not unique, save for the fact that under the doctrine of , "My enemy of my enemy is my friend" many right wing groups in India do "cherish" good relations with Israel (BJP, RSS, Shive Sena of Mumbai and Modi in Gujrat).

We may take this further and say that many Muslim countries of whom there are 57......are more Zionist and Israeli friendly than India. Turkey has very extensive security and economic relationships with Israel. Such that some important Jewish commentators such as Michael Ledeen refer to Turkey as Israel's proxy militia in the Middle East. What of the role of Egypt in cooperating with Israel in blocking off the Palestinians in Gaza? and their massive aid taken from the USA on this understanding. Or Saudi Arabia which for many years has clandestinely cooperated with Israel over many issues. Pakistan not too long ago had an Israeli agent as its President doing EXACTLY what the Israelis wanted-----Musharaf, waiting in London to get back into power with Israeli backing.

3. Is Mullah Iran a source of pride for Muslim countries?

Mullah Iran was put into power by the USA/UK/France/Israel to destroy and destabilize the promising country. Millions have died under mullah rule through civil war, wars with Iraq.....and through security operations of the mullahs which is one of the most repressive regimes that Persia has experienced since the rule and invasion of the Mongols 800 years earlier.

Diplomatically Iran is also isolated from many important Western countries.....source of vital trade and technology.

The Human rights situation is appalling, where medieval justice on minor offenses are carried out. Iran is a country that executes more children than any other country annually.

3/4 million mostly educated Iranians have opted to leave the country due to the dire situation of the country, and the open encouragement of the mullahs whose main power base are the urban and rural poor. Middle class Iranians are not so easily fooled by the "holy" sanctimonious speeches of the mullahs day after day, week after week, month after month, year after year.

Iran through speeches, signs and internal action is also a hostile power, and quite provocative.

The present Supreme leader has been in his position since 1989. He was not qualified for the position, but because he was ideologically like Rohullah Khomenei, with a similar name he was chosen. Under his rule from 1989 to 1999 a Jew named Saeed Imami deputy headed of VEVAK....Iran's intelligence service. Like a good Jew agent within Iran he went around killing various Iranians he did not like including possibly Ahmed Khomenei, Khomenei's son.

Why did the Supreme Leader allow such crimes in Iran under his rule? Why did he allow a Jew into such a sensitive position? Why does the Supreme leader display such fondness for promoting Jews into important positions in Iran, as with the case of Ahmedinejad?

By what right does he point accusing fingers at other nations by calling them Zionist, (which are strategically beneficial to Iran), when he himself runs such an overt Zionist state, where VEVAK officers meet with MOSSAD officers in Rome and Paris as they clandestinely discuss cooperation over Saddam's Iraq and many other issues.........Iran/Contra...etc.


"Friend' Iran calls India a Zionist regime"

By Times of India.

Iran is a close friend of India, but that has not prevented its supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, from asking the world's Muslims to support the "struggle" in Kashmir against "Zionist regimes".

In his Haj message to pilgrims earlier this week, Khamenei said, "Today the major duties of the elite of the Islamic Ummah is to provide help to the Palestinian nation and the besieged people of Gaza, to sympathize and provide assistance to the nations of Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and Kashmir, to engage in struggle and resistance against the aggressions of the United States and the Zionist regime, to safeguard the solidarity of Muslims and stop tainted hands and mercenary voices that try to damage this unity, to spread awakening and the sense of responsibility and commitment among Muslim youth throughout Islamic communities."

In the 1990s, India had registered its gratitude to Iran for helping it out diplomatically on Kashmir on human rights. But despite it all, Iran continues to play the Kashmir card in the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC), as do other Islamic countries even as they privately tell the Indian foreign office that they did not mean it.