Impressions about Iran

Quoth Ahmedenijad on Saturday:

Iran`s president called Britain ``arrogant`` Saturday for not apologizing, media in Iran reported.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad -- in remarks carried by state radio and reported by the state-run Islamic Republic News Agency -- said, ``The occupying British forces entered our waters, and our border guards, with courage and alertness, arrested them.``

Instead of issuing any regret or displaying any shame, Britain postured, he said, issuing declarations and making speeches.

``These arrogants, due to their arrogant mentality and selfishness, instead of apologizing, they acted as if we owe them,`` he said.

Haha.

Ahmadinejad also took a wider swipe at Britain and other Western nations.

``In the last 300 years, the arrogant powers have been stealing from other nations. They have enslaved the people of other nations,`` he said.

He said that after World War II, the Western countries ``declared themselves the winners and created international organizations in order to continue their domination over the rest of the world.``

``The arrogant powers unfortunately today are openly breaking the laws that those international organizations they themselves founded and created,`` Ahmadinejad said, according to IRNA.

Haha

#64 by sri

When did I eat your `namak` sir? oops ... sri ..

#61 by zeemax

`` I see. Thanks hindoo. ``

You are welcome NamakHaram.

#62 by chaltahai on March 30, 2007 12:08pm PT


link

Under questioning, Burns acknowledged Iran`s heavy dependence on imported gasoline was a ``point of leverage`` for the United States as it continues to pressure Tehran to rein in its nuclear program.

Iran imported 150,000 barrels of gasoline per day in 2005, when its total consumption was 400,000 bpd, making it the second biggest gasoline importer after the United States, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

But a European diplomat told Reuters there had been ``no definitive discussions yet`` among major powers about sanctioning gasoline, which would be complicated by the fact that much of Iran`s supply comes from India.

WSJ Opinion today suggests that the leverage is OIL with Iran. Iran is awash with cash from Crude sales but imports 40% of gasoline. Cut off the gasoline exports to Iran and choke the MF`kers.

#59 by sri

I see. Thanks hindoo.

#41, HP {``How Iranians view the movie 300...here is a little article explaining Iranian view point. ``}

HP,
Welcome back. I thought that your little article explaining the Iranian view is quite interesting. Seriously, we are talking about a movie, albeit with some sophomoric political, national, ethnic agendas. Hollywood has distorted history, logic, and common sense when portraying Germans, Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese, Arabs, Iranians (Persians), Palestinians, Muslims, Pakistanis, Russians, and even Native American Indians. It just depends on their designation of the ``bete du jour.`` Even Bollywood has lost its objectivity when referring to Pakistan as the persistent and most ``popular`` enemy. Asking Hollywood and Bollywood to be objective is like requesting Lahoris to comment fairly about Punjabi culture and civilization.

#54 by zeemax

`` Did anyone see those `mariners` scared as hell wolfing down Iranian food like pigs?

And bLiar is going all mad over `parading` of hostages etc ... but can`t do a shyte ... haha ``

Nice Bravado indeed.

You do realize if Britons become as irresponsible as the retarded Islamic pigs they can easily turn entire middle-east in to GLASS PARKING LOT. And they can do this without even sweating much, just with few nuclear submarines parked offshore and armed with Trident Nuke Missiles.

PS : GLASS PARKING LOT happens when the heat from a Nuclear explosion is so intense that it turns sand in to glass.

two things..why is the woman eating along with others? should she not be in a separate dinign area?

last time iranis took goras hostage, they had to pay back with an expensve 8 year war with saddam. this time the war may involve the new and improved JF-17 aircraft.

One fails to understand what is the necessity of making the girl sailor cover her head with a scarf. Is it not enough that the Mullahs are already smothering their own women why subject foreigners to this incongruity? One sees it in telecasts from Arab countries and also Iran. Poor Islamic countries like Pakistan also do it, maybe to keep up with the Joneses (or maybe Younises). Looks so out of place. Travelling around the world one sees this fashion(?) picking up even in Southeast Asian countries. These women look as if they are under punishment. With no disrespect to the women, they would look more presentable with their hair flowing and jewellery around their necks and in the ears. One can only sympathise with these poor souls. Allah the Merciful save them

Tony Blair on the detentions without trial at Guantanamo Bay for 4 plus years: ``...it is an anomaly``

Tony Blair on the Iranian seizure of 15 British personnel from disputed waters in the Shatt al Arab/Arvandrud: ``...it is unacceptable``.

Did anyone see those `mariners` scared as hell wolfing down Iranian food like pigs?

And bLiar is going all mad over `parading` of hostages etc ... but can`t do a shyte ... haha

Re: # 46

Iranian mullahs could have made an alliance of conveniance with the Soviets if USA hit them during the cold war. Iranians backed the Hezbollah to blow up marines and kidnap American hostages in Lebanon. Remember the Iran Contra deal. Guess what all the hostages were released in 1990. After the cold war ended Iranian rulers knew that they were at the mercy of the Pentagon.

Re: # 48

It is easy to be an asshole when you are sitting on world`s largest oil reserves. It pays to be polite when you are on the dole from America.

Re: # 40

`` ISLAMABAD: Intelligence agencies have informed the Interior Ministry that Baitullah Mehsud, leader of the Taliban in Waziristan, fled to Afghanistan on Friday. Sources told Daily Times on Tuesday that the intelligence reports mentioned that Mehsud had several meetings with “INDIAN SPIES” and former Afghan premier Gulbadin Hekmatyar in Afghanistan this week. The reports said that Hekmatyar had met Mehsud at an undisclosed location, while ``Indian Integelliancs Officers``met him at Mazar-e-Sharif. The sources said that the intelligence agencies could not get the details of the meetings and Mehsud’s close aides in Waziristan were unaware of his whereabouts. ``

Mazar-e-Sharif is several hundred miles from the Pakistan border. I wonder how a wanted Taliban warlord can travel hundreds of miles undetected.

`` Never understood why have relations with ``friend`` when he helps sabotage acts , we can be better without friends. India can have one office in Kabul but no need tyo have 6 offices and raw people running around with bags full of explosives. Cut trade between India and A.Stan and put Ban on indian air flight to A.Stan over our skies. ``

India can fly over the Arabian Sea and Iranian airspace to Afghanistan

`` Some stupids want to import Indian movies. It really difficult to understand what is going on.
India is going to arab summit as invitee by Palestain govt including Hammas. Few days back Indian army overlord JJ Singh flew to Israel and had ``friendly`` discussion. People like YLH should leave Gandhi and write letters to Arab news papers and expose Indian attitude of crying for palestaninas and then partying with Israels. General should have told bluntly to Arab retards you can have India or Pakistan your choice. Last time General gave ultimum to Worthless Islamic group meeting and they cancelled Observers status to India though Russia was invited which aginst spirit when they are doing same as in Kashmir.
Time has for intellucts to pay attention to Pakistani interest than getting obsession on Mr. Gandhi. ``

Why pick on India for dealing with Israel ? Most Arab states kiss Uncle Sam anyway.

`` Iranaian have problems with ``majority Arabs in Kuzestan``. Iranians are recist and they cry regarding rising Arab population in Kuzestan ( they whine arabs have too many children). As Iranian Chamaddi is cream colored they feel superior to arabs. But Arab and Jew are same blood and look at so many Intelluctual giants, artists, newspaper editors or senetaors in usa and big people arab+ jews have produced. Iranians are dumb compared to arabs, even with big population and help from israel they could not defeat Saddam Husain, or Taliban. Only America tamed both still they are about to go war with usa. They can become good friend with USA and screw Arabs and give heart and panic attack to arab autocrat. Instead of being friend with Pakistan, only country helping and read to usa to stop they are making big walls separating walls against spirit of Brother hood. ``

Iran and Pakistan are rivals. I would say even more than India and Pakistan.

`` Iranians are strange people they hate arabs as they are similar to jews and have african blood. They so much oil wealth but still its backward county than Pakistan in every respect. They need to start self criticism. ``

What is so right or wrong in disliking Arabs ? They could ask Pakistanis why should suck up to the Arabs ?

How is Iran backward to Pakistan in every respect ?
lower birth rate
higher literacy rate
higher life expectancy

I watched the movie `300` in a IMAX theatre. The movie is phenomenal in its special effects, especially if you view it in a IMAX. Yeah, it is rather one-sided, but it is sort of like Indiana Jones movies. Did Indians get all crazy about Indian Jones movies where Indians were portrayed as barbarians eating brains and insects? The Iranians are just too sensitive and anyway the movie is about pre-Islamic times. So they can claim that it was all jahiliyat before the civilizing influence of Islam. :-)

having said that i dont know why they are holding the british seamen captive. i can think of no reason unless they actually were trespassing. it was probably part of a covert mission to check out iranian defences before a US-led military strike.

remember the first victim of any conflict is the truth.

Re: # 47

ermmm..instead of being `illiterate` he is probably the only world leader--or one of a handful--who actually has a PhD. In chemistry I believe or one of the other science/engineering subjects.

he has more balls than any leader in the world with the possible exception of chavez.
our president-chief-of-army could learn a lesson or two from him in what self-respect and honour are.

That stupid moron Nejad -- he is another son of a bush in Iran -- the little bastard is hell bent upon giving every stupid pretext to the bigger B&Bs of the world to attack Iran. “The brits were 0.5 kilometer in Iranian waters” -- big deal! -- 0000.5000 km in an uncharted area.

Question is what he is going to do with those hostages -- return them after 444 bombs later?

Since his inception this illiterate mediocre president of Iran, just like his illiterate mediocre American cousin -- is dealing in totally unnecessary provocative inanities.

it is about time for Iran`s `spiritual` Shahenshah Khameini to give Iran its much needed Nejat from mr. Nejad -- a nattering nincompoop and a sorry excuse for a president of a country like Iran.

#44 by arjun2

Hahaha ... and since when was USSR Iran`s ally? .. hahaha ..

Keep clutching at straws ..

#40 by ahmedmadani on March 27, 2007 11:06pm PT


Articles on paki newspaper websites pulled out of paki rears don`t constitute proof...Let`s see you produce a non-paki link the corroborates this...

#42 by zeemax on March 27, 2007 11:34pm PT

That was during the cold war and the US couldn`t escalate..or perhaps you forgot....

Rumour of U.S Strike on Iran next Friday...

**Intelligence sources in Moscow claim to have information that a US strike against Iranian nuclear installations has been scheduled for April 6 at 0040 hours. The Russian sources say the US operation, code-named ``Bite,`` will last no more than 12 hours and consist of
missile and aerial strikes devastating enough to set Tehran`s nuclear program several years back.***

#30 by arjun2,

The iranians wouldn`t be foolish enough to pick up American forces in this way....

Really? I though they were `foolish` enough to pick up the entire US embassy staff of 90 plus their cook and hold them for over a year just for an apology .. or perhaps you forgot :)

What`s different now?

How Iranians view the movie 300...here is a little article explaining Iranian view ponit.

Bad history, worse timing
Warner Brothers could not have found a worse time in history to release movie like ``300``

Hamed Vahdati Nasab
March 13, 2007

As an archaeologist and as the author of one of the petitions against the movie 300, I would like to shed some light on some of the aspects of the movie 300. At the time of this publication the petition that started on March 4th, 2007 has exceeded 38,000 signatures.
Briefly, the movie portrays the famous battle of Thermopylae between the Persians and the Greeks that occurred in 480 B.C. During that battle, the Persian Imperial army had to cross a narrow gorge in order to reach the Greek mainland. The gorge was held by almost 300 Spartans backed by 4000-7000 Greek soldiers, and they managed to hold Persian army for few days.

Although there have been claims that the Persian soldiers numbered more than1 million, in actuality the correct number would have been somewhere around 200,000 since at that time, it would have been logistically impossible to mobilize 1 million army.
The movie demonstrates both Persians and Spartans on the eve of the battle. Interestingly enough, the way the film depicts the Spartans is more or less historically accurate, especially when it comes to their clothing, attitude, and internal historical political issues. However, when it comes to the Persian side, the film portrays an army of beasts, monsters and demons whose leader is a naked gender-confused King wearing a ridiculous number of piercing and chains!

There have been numerous claims pointing out that this movie is in a science fiction genre; therefore, these petitions are too passionate and needlessly serious. Science fiction by definition means “a genre (of literature, film, etc.) in which the setting differs from our own world (e.g. by the invention of new technology, through contact with aliens, by having a different history, etc.)”(Prucher, 2006).

According to this definition one might ask, how can we call the movie a fiction while it shows the actual events, places, and characters with their real names? And why is this so-called fiction only applied to demonize the Persian side? Everybody agrees that the battle of Thermopylae did happen, Leonidas was the name of the Spartan king, and Xerxes was indeed the Persian king. In the movie Persians were called by their actual names, and the only fictional part is to show the Persians as monstrous savages!

For these reasons, I am hesitant to call the movie 300, just a fictional movie. Insulting Persians by twisting the historical facts is as unjust as making a movie about Dr. Martin Luther King, picturing him as something different and calling it just “science fiction!”
Calling Persians barbarians and slave drivers is another unethical aspect of the movie 300. It is a proven scholarly fact that the Persian Empire in 480 B.C was the most magnificent and civilized empire. Persia was established by the Cyrus the Great, the author of the first human rights declaration. By pursuing a policy of generosity instead of repression, and by favoring local religions, the Persian Empire was able to inspire its newly conquered subjects to become enthusiastic supporters.

Frankly, it is fair to say that given the historical evidence, Persians were among the few nations who did not have slaves especially when it came to building their magnificent palaces. Clay tablets discovered by University of Chicago scholars in 1947 demonstrate that these royal palaces were built by workers who compensated based on their skills. This was in contrast to Egyptian and Roman architecture built on the backs of thousands of slaves.
While I’m certainly not a conspiracy theorist, I must say that Warner Brothers could not have found a worse time in history to release movie like 300. Given the conflict going on between Iran and some western countries, this could be translated as more support for inaccurate generalizations about Iran, and anything but a message of love between the West and Iran.

Dr. Hamed Vahdati Nasab is an Archaeologist at the Department of Anthropology, University of Alberta, Georgia, USA. Comment

Re: # 39 Indian idea of not geting involved in other countries.

Baitullah ‘flees to Afghanistan’

ISLAMABAD: Intelligence agencies have informed the Interior Ministry that Baitullah Mehsud, leader of the Taliban in Waziristan, fled to Afghanistan on Friday. Sources told Daily Times on Tuesday that the intelligence reports mentioned that Mehsud had several meetings with “INDIAN SPIES” and former Afghan premier Gulbadin Hekmatyar in Afghanistan this week. The reports said that Hekmatyar had met Mehsud at an undisclosed location, while ``Indian Integelliancs Officers``met him at Mazar-e-Sharif. The sources said that the intelligence agencies could not get the details of the meetings and Mehsud’s close aides in Waziristan were unaware of his whereabouts.

Incidently pipe and railway line exploded in B.Stan.

Never understood why have relations with ``friend`` when he helps sabotage acts , we can be better without friends. India can have one office in Kabul but no need tyo have 6 offices and raw people running around with bags full of explosives. Cut trade between India and A.Stan and put Ban on indian air flight to A.Stan over our skies.

Some stupids want to import Indian movies. It really difficult to understand what is going on.
India is going to arab summit as invitee by Palestain govt including Hammas. Few days back Indian army overlord JJ Singh flew to Israel and had ``friendly`` discussion. People like YLH should leave Gandhi and write letters to Arab news papers and expose Indian attitude of crying for palestaninas and then partying with Israels. General should have told bluntly to Arab retards you can have India or Pakistan your choice. Last time General gave ultimum to Worthless Islamic group meeting and they cancelled Observers status to India though Russia was invited which aginst spirit when they are doing same as in Kashmir.
Time has for intellucts to pay attention to Pakistani interest than getting obsession on Mr. Gandhi.

Iranaian have problems with ``majority Arabs in Kuzestan``. Iranians are recist and they cry regarding rising Arab population in Kuzestan ( they whine arabs have too many children). As Iranian Chamaddi is cream colored they feel superior to arabs. But Arab and Jew are same blood and look at so many Intelluctual giants, artists, newspaper editors or senetaors in usa and big people arab+ jews have produced. Iranians are dumb compared to arabs, even with big population and help from israel they could not defeat Saddam Husain, or Taliban. Only America tamed both still they are about to go war with usa. They can become good friend with USA and screw Arabs and give heart and panic attack to arab autocrat. Instead of being friend with Pakistan, only country helping and read to usa to stop they are making big walls separating walls against spirit of Brother hood.
Iranians are strange people they hate arabs as they are similar to jews and have african blood. They so much oil wealth but still its backward county than Pakistan in every respect. They need to start self criticism.

#35 why are you indians obsessed by skin color and by what you think pakistanis think of you? the average pakistani assumes the average indian is like one of those bollywood film stars anyway.

#37 there used to be this azeri foreign student when i first came to the US. ``Iranian bad people. They call us azerbaijan people khar...donkey`` he would say angrily, looking for sympathy. :-)

regarding the azeris in iran..........

sometime back i read that there were violent protests in iran/teheran when a persian newspaper carried a cartoon depicting azeris as a stupid cockroach.

#34 by ranjit

You must be kidding!
If a person of my limited resources can get a fairly good picture of ethnic relations in Iran, imagine what the US can do.


Despite all the issues in Iran, no one can deny the cultural influence that Persians have over the central and south Asia. I will primarily talk about Sindh. Pretty much every historic building in Sindh constructed before the British the last one thousand years, was inspired by Persian architect. The famous Sindhi tiles initially were just a crude copy of the Persian ceramic tiles. Similar Sindhi Ralli or the Quilt is of Persian origin. The famous necropolis in Makli, District Thatta heavily borrowed Persian architectural designs. Most sufi or the beggars that are revered in Sindh came to sindh from the current Iran. Because these beggars were Persians, they were treated differently than the regular Sindhi beggars and are now known as Sufis.

People can talk about Sanskrit and Persian being sister languages however; the Persian language influence over the north Indian languages is not due to sisterhood but because of the Indian rulers of Persian origin who ran the Indian court system in Farsi.

Both Hindi and Urdu borrow heavily from Farsi. Pretty much all fruits in both Hindi and urdu still have Persian names. Anaar, Angoor, Saeb are just a few examples. Words like barbaad, bardaasht and thousands other commonly used in both Urdu and Hindi are of Persian origin.

Balochi, Sindhi, Pushto languages would not be complete w/o the Persian’s help. They rely on Persian Grammar, composition and vocabulary enormously. Persian influence is undeniably huge on all central Asian languages too.

One clarification: In my previous post I used Irani when I was actually talking about the Farsi speaking or the Persian. 90% of Irani in the US are Persian or Farsi speaking and are racist to the core.

A sentence excerpted from Robert Fisk`s essay `savages`:

After Graham is wounded in Kabul, the Afghans - in the words of his Irish-born army doctor - have become ``murtherin villains, the black niggers``.

That is for the Pakistani chowkeys who keep referring to their light skin vis-a-vis the dark Indians

Re:HP#32

[..The issue before the US is whether a military action against Iran would sufficiently destroy the thin fabric of Iran nation and plunge Iran in to a Persian speaking versus the non Persian speaking civil war or not....]

HP, you are overestimating the depth of knowledge in the US state department or the pentagon. The US barely knew that there were shias and sunnis in Iraq who would fight after Saddam, as they imagined that they would be welcomed as liberators. I doubt if anyone in the US has any knowledge about the ethnic mix in Iran and its ramifications after a military strike.

Re: # 32

Most of the oil and natural gas is in regions inhabited by Arab minority. The Azeris, Kurds, Baluchis would lose out if they went independent. I can see the Azeris wanting to join Azerbaijan if it emerges something better than a banana republic. The Kurds face complications because of Iraq and Turkey. It looks like the Sunni Baluchis who are the most restless.

On second thoughts, my comparing Iranians with Pakistani and Indians, was wrong. I think Indians and Pakistan in general are not racist. They may have some hang ups about ethnicities and may have some regional biases but really both Indians and Pakistanis suffer so much from the inferiority complex that it is hard for them to conceive that they could be better than some folks other than of Indian or Pakistani origins. So the subcontinents racism is confined to its own people. Iranians on the other hand are a full blown case of racial hatred, if 1) you are not Persian speaking and 2) you are not White. If it is up to Iranians to decide who could live in this world or if you ask them to define superior races, Iranians would be unable to think beyond themselves and the Whites.

The current Iran is Iran because the name was changed when Hitler claimed the superiority of the Aryan race. It was inconceivable for Iranians to let the German claim go by without asserting that they are the true Aryans. Though there certainly are doubts about the validity of this claim.

The current Iran is barely 51% ethnic Persian speaking. A good number of people that are identified as Iranians are of many other ethnicities such as Azuris, kurd, turk, Baloch, and arab. Persian language is forced upon people so almost 100% can understand and speak it but they really are not Persian.

As I mentioned in my previous post, Iran has systematically attacked and subjugated other ethnic groups in Iran. Though now Azuris have begun to assert themselves in areas outside of Tehran. Ethnic clashes and uprisings are kept under tight control and often the outside world is not aware of what is taking place inside that country.

Like many other countries where ethnic differences, cultural, political and economical, are not resolved through a democratic dialog between the ethnic groups, Iran too would see a severe civil war if the central authority is some how physically removed from Tehran.

We saw that phenomenon in Iraq where once the central authority was eroded by the US occupation, it was simply a matter of time for the ethnic and sectarian violence to erupt and continue unabated.

In reality all countries where several ethnicities are combined under one flag and are governed from the top down rather than the top up method, eventually a loss of the central authority would cause major civil wars. We saw that in the former Eastern Europe. Closer home Afghanistan is another good example. Pakistan remains at the verge of a full blown ethnic regrouping but is mostly sustained by strong central force the Army. So if the army in Islamabad is somehow taken out, it will be seriously difficult to keep Pakistan as one country.

We also saw this when India was partitioned when the central British authority was weakened by the second WW and there was no force left, that could have worked with all groups to keep the country united.

In Pakistan’s case, the only redeeming feature is that historically both Sindhi and Punjabis have more things in common than the issues that divide them. In Pakistan, before 1971 Bengali reached that point because they really had nothing in common with people in West Pakistan.

Similarly before partition a Sindhi or Pathan or even a Punjabi had very few things in common with South or East Indians and the decision to form Pakistan was an easy decision to make.

Coming back to Iran, there is a strong urge in the US to find a way to remove the central authority in Iran to plunge that country in to a serious ethnic and sectarian violence like the way it was done in Iraq. The issue before the US is whether a military action against Iran would sufficiently destroy the thin fabric of Iran nation and plunge Iran in to a Persian speaking versus the non Persian speaking civil war or not.

Imo, if the US is able to remove the establishment in Tehran, Iran would very quickly slide towards a civil war.

The problem is usually not with the people of a country or community. It is invariably with what its citizens or members are willing to put up with as their leaders, for whatever reasons, be they rooted in fear, ideology, archaic mindsets, or most frequently simple apathy. The Iranians let those mullahs romp all over themselves; just like the Pakistanis let those khakis drag them around like an ox with rope running through its nose – often making inane snorts to exclaim its claim to manhood. Impotent people plus lousy leaders spells catastrophe for the whole population.

#28 by zeemax on March 27, 2007 11:16am PT


(Hint: Dozens of Iranians are held in Iraq on charges of espionage by the coalition)


nice try, but the iranian diplomats were arrested by the American forces, not british forces. The iranians wouldn`t be foolish enough to pick up American forces in this way....

You and your trick questions, Zee! LOL

Question:

Should Iran release the 15 Brit mariners caught in their waters?

(Hint: Dozens of Iranians are held in Iraq on charges of espionage by the coalition)

If yes, why?

bbabu

mmm, not sure if `leftist` would be a fine-grained enough identifier here...I am certain HP and GT have thought more deeply about that issue than I have.

Re: # 17

Stalin and Mao had the maturity and cold blooded instincts to survive.

Re: # 20

kaal:

Your point about `true` leftists reminds me of Oscar (the horse) in Animal Farm. Personally, I have had friends from the CPM who were cast aside after a lifetime of work simply for suggesting more democracy in the party. So, the point that I am making is that these good folks are taken advantage of even by their own parties.

HP:

Welcome back. I have never visited Iran and so I shall take what you say seriously. But that surprises me more. For a start consider the following:

(i) Like Ranjit, and you say, there is racism everywhere. However, unlike in Pakistan and in India the Iranians seem to understand that there is racism in Iran and that racism is not the best facet to carry around. (This is just my guess and I may be wrong).

(ii) I try to watch programmes on Iran whenever I can. There was this footage of burkha clad women discussing family planning in a masjid (or maybe in its premise). Heck, these women were more liberated than many bimbos I have come across who know zilch about their rights or how thet are exploited.

(iii) To end, go to the math olympiad website and see Iran`s ranking (compare it with India`s or Bulgaria`s). I shall not tell you more for that will take away all the excitement.

#17 Kal
``Wonder if that strengthens the theory about most leftists being men and women who never attain emotional maturity or political adulthood``
there is some merit to that statement ...Churchill once said if you are young and not a liberal you don`t have a heart and if you are older and not a conserative you don`t have a mind....i guess leftists take some time to give up...recently west bengal govt. communist regime fired ion nnocent farmers to take there land for capitalist Tata mnc business venture....

#21 by jamesmaxwell on March 27, 2007 3:10am PT


I remember the scene from Crash where the gunstore owner heaps racist abuse on the iranian but what really hurts him is that the guy called him an arab.

Re:HP#18

HP yaar, everyone and their uncle is a racist in this world. Its just that when they face racism from others, they adopt a holier than thou attitude. Heck, even the tutsis and hutus in Rwanda are racists as one group thinks they are fairer than the other!!!

Iranians suffer from frustration that they are physically semi-``goras`` but are not recognized as such. How the hell will they get that appreciation if economically and culturally they are way below par as compared to Europe? If you cover your women up from head to toe and run a mullah led government with a crappy economy, how do you expect people to think of you as goras? Jeez!!

Re: # 18

Agreed.

There is a lot of fake racist pride in Iran which has been exacerbated by the unpopularity of the current regime. Some Iranians go to the extent of saying that the current regime is an ``Arab`` regime, which is plain wrong. Everything bad that has happened to Iran is blamed on the ``Arabs``, which is nonsense.

Islam and the Arabs have become very convenient scapegoats for young Iranians.

The most naive of all Iranians are second generation American-Iranians most of whom have never visited Iran.

Sorry, HP, I will not take up that challenge because none of that was meant for your eyes! An enthusiastic welcome to the board, however. :)

---

[You might have suspected so already: My posts don`t necessarily state my own personal beliefs and values, at least not literally and directly (Please be sure, all my past heroes have been from the left, and probably will continue to be in future. So sincere apologies for any resentment caused. It was unintended.)]

17 by kaalchakra

``Wonder if that strengthens the theory about most leftists being men and women who never attain emotional maturity or political adulthood...``

Excuse my french Kaal, but this has to be the worst and the most stupid comment that I have seen from you in years. The stupidity of this comment does not require a response but since it came from you, I thought I should register my resentment and challenge you to prove this urban myth that you have just created.

I spent just two weeks in Iran when I was just a teenager so I may not have “mostly pleasant memories” as I barely met common folks.

I have special interest in Iran. I can read farsi and I regularly visit Irani blogs and what I find there is ugly. Basically, Irani are as racist and discriminative as Indians and Pakistanis are. Iranians think they are white and despite being looked down upon for years in the US, they still cannot overcome their own racism and look down on people of color.

In reality, most of the Iran is as primitive and as feudal and tribal as Baloch and Pathan in Pakistan are. The religious leadership had always played an important role in irani politics however; they never solely took control of the state affairs. They acted against the Shah because they saw their important constituency slowly slipping away or I would rather say drifting from them during the Shah’s regime.

The revolution against the Shah was because of his rapid moves towards the westernization of the Irani Society. Shah’s savagery and authoritarianism certainly helped the dissent which was channeled into religious fervor.

Here is something for the ignorant Indians who basically have heard a few things about Iran and talk rubbish about Iran and its culture.

“These experiences though have not changed our sentiments towards other nationalities. We are famous for our hospitality. We have a false respect for Americans and Europeans (for whatever reason), but we find it difficult to offer the same respect to Afghans, for example.

We don`t mind the U.S. having atomic bombs, but when we hear that Pakistan is an atomic power the first thing that crosses our mind is why don`t WE have the technology when EVEN ``Pakis`` and ``Indians`` have them. We treat our Afghan guests in Iran like the way the Swedes treat Iranians.

Now, deny it as much as you want but we look DOWN at Pakistanis, Indians, Afghans, Arabs, Turks, ... And that`s not because of what they DO but for who they ARE, and I call that racism. Even if Aryans existed as a race and we were all their decedents, even if we were superior to all other nations, even if we had blue blood with yellow stripes running through our noble Persian veins, what good would that bring the world?”

If you have lived in Iran for five years you can understand what Ferdosi wrote:

ze shir-e shotor khordan o susmAr
arab rA be jAyi residast kAr
ke tAj-e kiAn rA konad Arezu
tofu bAd bar charkh-e gardAn, tofu


In one thousand years Irani or Persians attitude has not changed against the Arabs.

“We do not hear about the Turkman, Kurdish, Bakhtiari and Qashqai tribes that fell victim to starvation brought on by forced settlements. So much of our modern history is about how successive governments in Iran have overcome the misguided rebellion of ``foreign agents`` in different corners of Iran. The attempts of various ethnic groups to assert their cultural rights have for the last 100 years been met with violent repression, public hangings and hostilities which sometimes have escalated into contained and isolated versions of civil wars.”

Irani community in the US has been offended by the movie 300 and you will find Irani discussing it on every blog. Here is a snippet from one blog and he pretty much sums up the dejection at being portrayed as of African decent.

“Even though Persians are a race of white Indo-Europeans, their chosen king, as well as most of the high level functionaries, appear to be of African descent.”

GT, that`s a great point. So it is unfair to hold only Islamists responsible for exploiting leftists. Apparently every group that pursued an agenda totally contrary to theirs has effectively used leftists and spat them out in time.

Wonder if that strengthens the theory about most leftists being men and women who never attain emotional maturity or political adulthood...

Re: # 15

kaal:

No, not necessarily that way. The left joined hands with the clerics to topple the Shah, just like the left joined with the Jan Sangh (and others) to oppose the Emergency. Of course after the clerics came to power the first guys they went after were the leftists - just like in Iraq where saddam got rid of the leftists and the US clapped.

GT # 14 is right. Iran was an early (first?) grand alliance of leftists and Islamists - a natural combination that has become a powerful global merger of late.

Iran IS a great civilization.

#3

zee:

The Shah was not overthrown by the clerics alone. Just as the West does not understand Iran, neo-Islamists (groomed on cofee table ``Islam made easy`` written by Pakistani aunties who claim to be inspired by UBL) do not understand Iran either.

Author good article, very balanced

Re: # 10
couldn`t agree more.

greece had a brilliant civilisation, at the present time it relies on hand outs from rest of EU.

the inherited system has long been discredited. no one would go for treatment to a man who claimed that his father was a very good dentist, same principle applies to countries as well.

Iranians are civilized people who have held onto their culture inspite of nut jobs like Ayatollah Khomeini. It is one of the greatest failures of US foreign policy that the US considers barbaric countries like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia allies, while putting down Iran.

Recently, ex-president Khatami was in india and its good to see that he combined cultural tourism even while having some frank discussions with the indians. I cannot imagine the islamo-supremacist saudis or their slaves in pakistan ever participating in any such thing.

http://www.hindu.com/2007/03/25/stories/2007032502781000.htm

SECULAR OUTLOOK: The former Iranian President Mohammad Khatami comes out after visiting the Swaminarayan Akshardham temple in New Delhi on Friday.

Re: # 8,
The past is no indicator of the present. Persia might have been a great power in history, but it has no bearing on modern Iran.

Re:zeemax#3

No one bothered Iran when Khatami was in power. He was a wise man, led the country properly and everyone respected Iran. Now you have a buffoon, goonda type guy Ahmedinijad in power, who threatens countries with annihiliation and is developing nukes. What do you expect the world to do? Just sit by and let him do what he wants? If you behave irresponsibly, you pay the consequences. That holds true for Bush and it holds true for Ahmedinijad.

If Iran has nuclear ambitions who can stop them from getting there? Persia was once one of the great powers in the Northern hemisphere, posing a serious challenge to the Greek power in Europe. They were a military and a political force to reckon with in the mideaval era. Iranian culture has left its mark in several parts of Central Asia, many people adopting their language and customs. Persian was a court language even in India. You just cannot keep a great nation down. Iran will achieve the nuclear advance it seeks on its own steam, but one only wishes they would not buy technology underhand from that nuclear terrorist called Qadeer Khan.

Iran has always been a good friend of India and always sensitive to India`s position on Kashmir. India`s vote against Iran in the United Nations recently in the nuclear issue was therefore really unfortunate.

Iran`s defense of the Arab interests in the Mideast is of conviction, without any axe to grind.

Although Muslim, the Iranians have painstakingly preserved their Zorastrian history unlike the Pakistan-reared Taliban who took great delight in destroying the Bamian Buddhas.

In the past Iranians were Zorastrians, today it is an Islamic country where Mullahs rule, whatever may happen tomorrow, Iranians will always remain a great people.

Individually the Iranians are a very cultured and soft spoken people, always courteous in their demeanour. Always respectful to other faiths, Iranians living in harmony in Western India for several years are a testimony to their accomodating nature. Iranian contribution to art is also well known.

#1 by jamesmaxwell on March 26, 2007 4:08am PT

Iranians are also the most pro-American of any muslims..

unfortunately, it looks like there will be a war on Iran before the decade is out...this time, it will be an air war..easier for the warmongering hitlery to support...

click on the link for the whole article with links etc...

The Coming War With Iran
Is it inevitable?
by Justin Raimondo
The timing of the recent incident in which 15 British sailors were arrested by Iran at the mouth of the Shatt al-Arab waterway for purportedly entering Iranian waters couldn`t have been more provocative if it had been planned that way. And perhaps it was. The question is, however, who did the planning?

It happened on the eve of a vote in the UN Security Council to impose stricter sanctions on Iran and in the wake of escalating rhetoric from U.S. government officials blaming Iran for anti-occupation activity in Iraq. On top of that, recent events include the kidnapping of Iranian consular officials in Irbil, Kurdistan, by U.S. forces, reports of covert U.S. support for terrorist attacks inside Iran, the ``disappearance`` of a major Iranian military figure in the elite Revolutionary Guards unit, and suspicions that the Mossad may have had a hand in killing a renowned Iranian nuclear scientist. Add it all up, and there seems little doubt as to who carried out what seems like a brazen provocation.

Go here for the semiofficial British version of the confrontation: according to this account, we are supposed to believe that the Iranians entered Iraqi waters to ``ambush`` the Brits, who were engaged in what is described as a ``routine`` patrol of the disputed waterway in search of suspected smugglers. Car smugglers were offloading their merchandise onto a barge when they were approached by the Brit patrol and fled into Iranian waters – but not before ``irking`` the British crew:

``The suspected smugglers complied with the British orders and the crew returned to its rigid hull inflatable boats (rhibs) to continue its patrol, only to turn around and see the traders laughing in its direction.``

Laughing at Her Majesty`s sailors, who were guarding the civilized world from the pernicious plots of car smugglers, was surely an act of war. After all, isn`t a car a ``weapon of mass destruction`` in present-day Iraq? The Brits weren`t going to let the Iranians off the hook quite so easily, and the next day they returned to the same waters to find the same smugglers plying their trade. The British patrol made a beeline for the smugglers, but this time the smugglers didn`t run – and the poor naïve Brits walked right into the trap. No sooner had they boarded the vessel than they were surrounded on all sides by Iranian gunboats. Last anybody heard of their fate, they were in Tehran and the Iranians were talking about putting them on trial for espionage.

The Iraqi commander in charge of guarding Iraq`s territorial waters, Brig. Gen. Hakim Jassim, has a different story to tell, as reported here:

``The Iraqi military commander of the country`s territorial waters cast doubt on claims the Britons were in Iraqi waters. `We were informed by Iraqi fishermen after they had returned from sea that there were British gunboats in an area that is out of Iraqi control. We don`t know why they were there.```

Ah, but I suppose it depends on which fisherman you ask. At any rate, no fisherman in the area will be interviewed by anyone in the Western news media any time soon, because, as the UK Independent notes, all reporters have been ``ordered away`` by coalition forces. The Brits are hedging their bets: even while Tony Blair denies Iranian charges of ``blatant aggression`` and openly threatens Tehran,

``Lord Triesman, a Foreign Office undersecretary who had held talks with Iran`s ambassador on Saturday, told Sky News there was good evidence the men were in Iraqi waters, but that the issue of whether the sailors had strayed into Iranian waters was only a technical one. `I`ve been very clear throughout that the British forces do not ever intentionally enter into Iranian waters,` he said. `There`s no reason for them to do so, we don`t intend to do so, and I think people should accept there`s good faith in those assertions.```

Although the Iranians claim the captured recording devices provide solid evidence that the Brits knew they were in Iranian waters, Iranian officials have so far declined to release the precise coordinates where the interception took place. One awaits further evidence, as opposed to the straight reporting of the British government`s explanation as if it were fact. In any event, you`ll note that various descriptions of the Shatt al-Arab waterway are often preceded by the word ``disputed`` – due to the fact that nobody really knows what defines the exact boundary between Iran and Iraq along this crucial oil route. Which is precisely why this area is such a perfect staging ground for the War Party`s next adventure in ``regime change.``

Both Ron Paul and Antiwar.com columnist Philip Giraldi have warned about the likelihood of a Gulf of Tonkin-style incident in the Persian Gulf, and their predictions have, sadly, proved all too accurate. That it involves the British, not the Americans, is a double victory for the on-to-Tehran crowd: the war-weary Brits, who recently announced the withdrawal of their troops from southern Iraq, will presumably be dragged along in the wake of the coming U.S. military assault as their sailors are paraded before the cameras in Tehran. Once again, ``coalition`` forces are about to take down a Middle Eastern government, and they are already on the move.

The War Party`s propaganda campaign has gone into high gear as a result of this incident, evoking memories of yet another ``hostage crisis`` and characterizing the incident as an Iranian provocation designed to set up a prisoner exchange, in which the Iranians would hand over their captive Brits for Iranians recently detained in Iraq – the latter supposedly numbering in the ``hundreds.``

As part of the general propaganda offensive, U.S. News is reporting yet another incident, this time involving the Americans and Iraqi troops, who were allegedly surrounded by Iranian Revolutionary Guards well inside Iraq. This supposedly occurred in September of last year – yet we`re only learning about it now.

On the ground in the Middle East, the forces that will engage in a mighty clash of civilizations are gathering – while, on the home front, the Israel Lobby is preparing the ground by softening up any possible opposition. This means zeroing in on the Democratic Party, lining up the major presidential candidates in support of a strike against Tehran, and smearing any and all war opponents as anti-Semitic enablers of the nuclear-armed, Holocaust-denying Iranian regime.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi`s recently-passed ``antiwar`` legislation – funding the conflict while giving the president plenty of room to evade a conditional withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq by sometime in 2008 – is being hailed as a great achievement by the Huffington Post`s David Sirota and other party-lining apologists for the DNC, but what these people somehow fail to mention is the stripping out of a provision that would have forced Bush to go to Congress before launching an attack on Iran.

No one should be surprised by this open invitation to the president to commence the bombing at his convenience. After all, Democrats have been more belligerent than the Bush administration when it comes to Iran. Hillary Clinton has accused the Bushies of mollycoddling Tehran, and Democratic Party national chairman Howard Dean opined to Chris Matthews that the tragedy of our wrongheaded intervention in Iraq was that it diverted attention away from the ``real threat`` – Iran. Asked by Matthews if we ought to go to war with Iran, Dean – like the big-time Democratic presidential wannabes – refused to take it off the table.

The Democrats, to their dismay, may soon find that it is being put on the table by George W. Bush – and how they react will determine whether they go down in history as opponents of this war-crazed administration, or its craven enablers. I`d be willing to bet the farm on the latter, and, in this context, rumors of a U.S. attack on Iran scheduled for April seem more credible by the hour.

I would note, in passing, and purely as a speculative matter that oil prices are already spiking in response to rumors of war in the Gulf, and perhaps this is the key to understanding the Democrats` capitulation. After all, the political atmosphere would certainly change – to the Democrats` advantage – if the price of oil were to truly skyrocket, say, to $200 a barrel. This would virtually ensure a Democratic victory in `08. That another side effect would be to trigger a worldwide economic collapse is just a minor matter, and perhaps as good an opportunity as any to institute some real New Deal-style ``reforms`` of the American economic system. Statist liberals have been complaining ever since 9/11 that George W. Bush has never really asked us to make ``sacrifices`` in pursuit of victory in the ``war on terrorism,`` bemoaning the lack of a tax hike and disdaining the president`s call for the nation to ``go shopping`` in response to the biggest terrorist attack in our history. Having caused a major economic as well as geopolitical catastrophe as a result of making war on Iran, our pro-sacrifice liberals – especially those in Congress who initially signed on to the attack on Iraq – may believe an attack on Iran is a small price to pay for power.

We keep hearing that the U.S. will never attack Iran because we don`t have the troops or the military reserves. Lawrence O`Donnell, for one, keeps saying this on The McLaughlin Group, but I don`t believe it for a minute. The Lobby is pushing hard on this one, and, politically, the War Party has lined up the leadership of both the Democrats and the Republicans, as Pelosi`s capitulation on the Iran proviso makes all too clear. As long as domestic political support for an attack spans both parties and includes the key element of ``liberal`` Democrats like Pelosi and Chairman Dean, all systems are ``go`` for war with Iran.

God may forgive them: I will not.

#4 by Shah2

Hahaha ... you said it ..

#3 by zeemax on March 26, 2007 7:41am PT


to give Kashmir to the hindus


Wanting it really really bad and being utterly incapable of taking it isn`t the same as giving it...

that`s like the fox ``giving up`` the grapes

``The world has gone wrong somewhere in understanding them or stereotyping them with other Islamic fundamentalists like the Talibans. It must be remembered that Islam has many faces``

nay they undestand very well..Talibans we not considerd funamentalists when they were fighting against the Russians in the 80s..
Carter administration & then Secretary ofState Brizinsky called for Jehad against godless communists ...Its not your fault that theyPRETEND to not understand you .they know very well.

Author,

There is need for the world to understand the Iranians better

Sincere attempt but futile.

Did everyone understand Iranians in Shah`s time or not? Are these not the same Iranians? Or are the only Iranians those sitting in L.A.?

Everyone will understand Iran, or Pakistan, or Iraq, or anyone else for that matter, as soon these stop being a nuisance and let their enemies play havoc with their countries, kill three quarter of a million Muslim people to hang just one man, to give Kashmir to the hindus and Palestine to the Jews, occupy three Muslim countries and docilely submit, and most importantly, to either expunge about half of the Quran or put it aside altogether and pick up the code coolies handbook in its place.

Only then, everyone will understand Iran as you wish them to do. These are the only `hurdles` in understanding Iranians or any other defiant Muslims.

Propaganda is a very powerful tool, which is effectively used to control the minds of people in West. Unfortunately, the global policies are conjured up in West and enforced thru a policy of might is right. This propaganda prevents people of West to make consceincious and morally correct decisions viz a viz rest of the world. For example, the other day they were showing a documentary on a major network TV; its name was either 20/20 or 60 minutes; I am forgetting at this time. They were showing US government`s internet monitoring unit, headed by a General. This unit monitors the ``so-called`` jihadi websites over the internet. Now this General came on the TV and claimed that internet was the number one tool to recruit suicide bombers in Iraq and Afghanistan. Well, I can give him Iraq, even though the Western propaganda machinery also portray it as a ountry where West is about to introduce in-door plumbing but Afghanistan? For God`s sakes people over there wipe their asses with stones after shitting, and this asshole of a general was claiming that youth over there spend their waking hours pryed to the internet jihadi websites and planning for suicides. He claimed that ``we capture and kill them everyday``. The so called investigative journalist who was supposed to question the integrity of his claims was busy spinning it further to increase the ``outrageous` factor of his TV ratings. What a world we live in.

I am waiting for the day when Iran or Venzuella will announce their separation from the UN and start a new organization of soveriegn free nations; the whole of latin America is going to join, I have no doubt. It will just need a bold step from one nation and the association of pimps and whores that is, Un, will be abolished.

Iran will be the first non-Arab country to get rid of Arab cultural imperialism. The signs are obvious.