Iran Former Pres. Khatami Continues Deceptive Presentation

DELHI - The head of Iran's Association of Combatant Clerics, Mohammad Khatami, continued Tehran's campaign of deception by visiting Delhi to attend the conference given by the Institute of India. Khatami is the real leader of Iran's foreign policy. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, though he is President, is not a cleric. Clerics have been leading Iran's foreign policy since the Islamic revolution in Iran, 1979, led by the Ayatollah Khomeini. The Council of Guardians, the power behind Iran's government, has permitted a non-cleric to be head of state because they know that before Ahmadinejad's terms end in 2009 the Jihad would have run its course and it will be easier for Iran to make the transition from war to peace with a non-cleric as President.

In the meantime Mohammad Khatami is to continue to perform his role of deceiver, by posing as a moderate. To lead and present the deception the Council found someone photogenic and who smiles a lot. No one can out beam Khatami, except perhaps professional actors, he can turn it off and on like a light, but occasionally, if you watch him closely, flashes of his hatred of the West and India come through. Those are the two main targets of Iran's war effort, the West, Iran's main rival for economic prominence and India as Tehran's way of supporting Pakistan and the people of Kashmir in order to control India's economic future. The India of today under Iran's control tomorrow. The Council basically told Khatami, fool people for as long as you can, but when Iran's foreign policy becomes more obvious your real character will be revealed.

Tehran wants to see if they can repeat Persia's successful invasion of India in the early 18th century. What is now Pakistan was part of Persia then and it was during the invasion Tehran looted a lot of gems, which it added to its collection left over from the first Persian Empire. The collection is part of the Iranian State Treasury housed in the vault of Iran's Central Bank, whose website is linked to Crossfire War. You can view some of the collection by clicking the site's link. Of course, not the entire state treasury has been seen by outsiders, not even by the House of Boucheron, which helped Tehran arrange some of the collection for viewing. The gems are one of the sources of financing for Tehran's foreign policy.

Islamabad has never had this kind of financial support before so of course they are going to take advantage of it, but before the war against India becomes allout the deception campaign continues. Khatami beamed at Delhi when he attended India's Republic Day ceremonies in January 2005. He beamed at the UN when he attended the September 2000 opening in which he spoke and proclaimed 2001 as the year of the dialogue. It was after Iran's 2005 Presidential election that August; Khatami was appointed Head of the Association of Combatant Cleric, as announced on crossfirewar.com, Aug. 8, 2005.

On Nov. 15, that same year, crossfirewar.com reported his passing through Vienna as a continuation of his Dialogue between Civilizations tour. Khatami's theme was "Annihilation", supposedly of weapons of mass destruction, but if he had spoken more candidly he would have said instead annihilation of Vienna and the UN International Atomic Energy Agency based there investigating Iran's nuclear weapons program. Recently Khatami attended the world's leadership conference at Davos, Switzerland, still trying the give the world's decision makers the impression that the issue of Iran's weapons program could be solved peacefully and that relations with the Islamic world as a whole can always be one of mutual cooperation and benefit. Of course in the state of mind behind the beaming he wants to see Switzerland's economic decisions controlled by Iranian banks, Bank Melli for instance, they've had an office in Paris, Avenue Montaigne for nearly a century. One of their bank officers, Albert Hakim, testified 20 years ago in Washington during the Reagan Adminstration's Iran-Contra Scandal, instituting the selling of Washington's foreign policy to Tehran.

So now Khatami is continuing his deceptive presentation in the Jihad's other main target, India. Unfortunately a lot of India's leaderships seems to have fallen for him and don't realize the energy pipeline project from Iran to India, passing through Pakistan, is not really a pipeline of peace, as described last year by Iran Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki, but a pipeline of deception.

Do you see no difference between USA providing (right now)billions of dollars in military aid plus advanced military hardware to kill Indians and a proposed pipeline deal thats could cost billions for which India hasn't paid a cent yet?

One is trade and other is direct military aid and support.

We need to see who's really stupid.

IMO a better way to access Iranian oil would be to free up Balochistan and the billions of India would have to shell out anyways would be better spent on stirring up the independence movement in Balochistan then passing the money to Pakistan. Either way my only concern is Iranian oil comes to India. We dont need anti-India, terrorist supporters and Paki-supporters advising us on how we should conduct our affairs. Thank you very much.

Gengis. You have already said you support the pipeline whether Balochistan is free or not. You want to fund the Pakistani army which you say wages terrorism against your own people. You say we are against India interests for dealing with your enemy, but you want to go against your own country's interests by dealing with the exact same people. Since you are pushing the Paki, Iranian, and Chinese agenda here, I can only conclude that you are the Paki supporter and you want India to pay billions to Pakistan to slaughter your own people. I do not make any pretense of putting India's interests before America's. I serve only my own country's interests. You on the other hand are a traitor to your own country and serve Pakistani, Iranian and Chinese interests.

"You have already said you support the pipeline whether Balochistan is free or not."

All I said was if India thinks it needs to go ahead with the pipleine deal then it should go ahead with it. Its India decision to make and India doesn't need anybody's advise.
Do you comprehend simple English?

Usted quisiera que lo dijera en español?

I am fine with whatever decision India take. I already told you the best alternative in my opinion (free Balochistan which you dont support).

You accuse me of wanting to have my own people slaughtered, why? Because I (in your mistaken opinion support paying the Pakis for the oil deal). By that line one logic all of AMERICA (including YOU since you already support Pakistan on the mistaken assumption that it apparently serve your country's interests) is already guilty of funding the Pakis with weapons and $$$. So by that line of thinking you are much more (then me) guilty of slaughtering of Indians.

You need meds Bub.

You calling me anti-Indian is much like an non-American calling you anti-American. Moreover you are a self-confessed Pak supporter and you are accusing an Indian of being anti-Indian. You have no idea how funny it sounds.

All I said was if India thinks it needs to go ahead with the pipleine deal then it should go ahead with it.

That's a lie. You have supported this deal with Pakistan and Iran from the beginning. Just to prove you are a liar, I will post your statements.

"Voting against Iran (India's only ally in the Islamic world) will virtually seal the fate of the multi-billion dollar oil and gas deal with Iran. India has already lost out to China on Central Asian oil and gas contracts. Loosing out on Iranian oil will put India in a real tight spot." - 6 posted on 01/26/2006 2:02:37 AM CST by Gengis Khan

By that line one logic all of AMERICA is already guilty of funding the Pakis with weapons and $$$.

That is exactly YOUR logic Gengis. I am the one applying it to you. I don't believe America is guilty of that at all. You do. I am simply applying your own standard to you.

I do not support Pakistan. That is just a lie you tell to smear me, because it's easier than trying to defend your indefensible pro-Pakistan and Pro-Iran position.

My position on Pakistan is this:
1. I support President Bush's policy of coercing Pakistan into helping us against the Taliban.

2. I do not support the overthrow of Musharraf unless it is accompanied by a full-scale military occupation of Pakistan by the US or India. To simply support a coup against Musharraf would be to support the very islamic theocrats who want him dead to stop him from cooperating with the US against the Taliban. You want the theocrats to win, and I don't.

You already know all this, but since you falsely accuse me, then I am compelled to publicly set the record straight. These positions are shared by most FReepers. You call me a terrorist supporter because you think anyone who supports President Bush supports terrorism against India. That is an anti-American lie. You are the one who supports terrorists and want them to succeed in assassinating Musharraf.

By the way Gengis, are you still in America? While you are here, be sure to tell Americans about your support for Iran and your idea that India should try to intimidate the US by supporting Iran and helping them kill our soldiers in Iraq. That is, unless you are too much of a coward to admit to Americans face-to-face where you really stand.

It's quite clear to me that the partition of India and Pakistan was a terrible mistake. But what do you care about the truth? You are too busy making up lies about Americans like me to care where we really stand.

I didn't "endorse" anything. If I was pro-Pakistan I would care alot about Kashmir and I would demand India withdraw form Kashmir. But I'm not. India's seizure of Kashmir from Pakistan does not concern me. It is a conflict between India and Pakistan which has nothing to do with the USA or our strategic interests. Maybe if India would go ahead and invade and conquer the rest of their lost Pakistani lands, then Indians like you would have less to bitch about and blame America for.

Their official stand is that Kashmir is a bilateral issue and they wish to see it “resolved peacefully and amicably” ...... (and sometimes they also add the clause) “in accordance to the wishes of the Kashmiri people” although off late they don't stress on that too much. Whatever it is, they would certainly like to see America stay out of the issue and so they actually support India’s stand that no third party should be involved in Kashmir.

Not many people know that Iran supports a small terrorist group (all Shia women suicide bombers, not very active) called “Duktaran-e-Millat” (Daughters of the nation) in Kashmir.

During Narasimha Rao’s tenure the OIC was about to pass a resolution to pressure India into accepting a UN sponsored plebiscite in Kashmir. The resolution was introduced by Benazir Bhutto and Pakistan had the backing of almost all the Muslim countries with a few deciding to abstain (it should not be forgotten that the resolution also the tacit approval of the US). For the resolution to be passed it needed not only the approval of most of the members but also no members should oppose the resolution. At India’s request Iran was the only country that vetoed against the resolution.

With Pakistan, Iran’s relation has been both hot and cold. Iran is Shia and Pakistan is Sunni. During Taliban rule over Afghanistan Iran and Pakistan were directly poised against each other. In fact Iran, India and Russia were supporting the Northern Alliance. Even today Indian supplies are routed via Iran rather than over Pakistan. Iran is basically maintaining a balance in its relationship between India and Pakistan, on one hand they have the nuclear cooperation with Pakistan and on the other hand they desperately would like to get Indian support. Iran is in danger of being isolated internationally (just like Iraq under Saddam). Indian support is their big ticket to not only end their isolation but also assume some amount of global importance. India being the only democratic country in the region, Indian approval of the Iranian regime gives them legitimacy that they can flaunt internationally. India is also their nearest and biggest market for oil. With Indian economic growth, India’s oil consumption will likely increase many fold. Our nearest source of oil is Iran (central Asian oil has been lost to China and Iraq is nowhere near stability). Whatever our relation with US and Israel, Iranian oil seems to be indispensable for India’s future economic growth.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.