Thread: Iraq/Dinar News. before Febuary 2nd 2006

im sure someone has seen it but i was at the doctors yesterday and picked up a copy of forbes magazine and there was an article on the dinar if i remember right it might have been the same thing that was on cnbc . it said something about betoniraq.com also had some professor that said the outcome would not be good.just thought i would throw it out there .

Originally Posted by BrabusSV12S

Thanks for the post Buddyboy and for the translation AlwaysDreaming. This is good news.... or is it? I'm hoping that some of you legal experts can help me with this dilema. I remember seeing an article a few weeks ago talking about a conflict between the HCL and the Iraqi constitution as regards the percentages of the distribution of the oil money. As we see in this article posted by Buddyboy the HCL dictates that the oil money is distributed evenly between the Kurds, Shiites and Sunnis. However, my understanding is that the Constitution states that the distribution is 40% to the Kurds and then the rest is somehow cut between the shiites and the Sunnis. I certainly hope that I'm wrong about this. However, based on how they have run everything else it would not surprise me if they didn't realize that these differences were issues until recently. I'm hoping that someone with more legal background can address this. I hope that this has already been addressed by the Iraqis and that amendments to the Constitution will not be required. If so, we could be looking at MONTHS of delay of the enactment of the HCL and FIL.

Let me know what you think.

Brabus

IS THERE A PROBLEM HERE?

I didn't get a response to my previous post so, I thought I'd try again. I have been informed by someone with contacts that there is a conflict between the HCL and the Constitution and that this will need to be amended prior to the HCL and FIL being enacted. I've been told that this could take MONTHS. Has this ever been addressed on the forum. I do remember reading something about this a few weeks ago and I think it was just blown off by everyone. I can't find the article. I'm hoping that this conflict is being addressed but, it would surprise me if they thought that far ahead. Any thoughts?

Brabus

With regards to the debate surrounding the calculation of the 1.29 rate how about this approach.....

Maybe the CBI believes the NID should be equal in value to the Euro, but due to the US involvement in their resurrection as a country they wish to peg the NID to the USD. Therefore we have 1 NID = 1 Euro = 1.29 USD.

So keeping the NID around the 1290 level means that the removal of the 3 zeros puts the NID at the value of the Euro, not the USD.

Of course, the whole situation regarding the numbers may just be coincidence, but we will find out when the reval finally takes place.

Just my thoughts as to this being a possibility.

Originally Posted by BrabusSV12S

IS THERE A PROBLEM HERE?

I didn't get a response to my previous post so, I thought I'd try again. I have been informed by someone with contacts that there is a conflict between the HCL and the Constitution and that this will need to be amended prior to the HCL and FIL being enacted. I've been told that this could take MONTHS. Has this ever been addressed on the forum. I do remember reading something about this a few weeks ago and I think it was just blown off by everyone. I can't find the article. I'm hoping that this conflict is being addressed but, it would surprise me if they thought that far ahead. Any thoughts?

Brabus

Pipshurricane quoted an article in his post #1135 above which details the Kurds current negotiations in finalizing the HCL. This is the final paragraph of the article.......

Kurds demand a free choice of the companies that would invest in oil within Iraq's Kurdistan, a right to sign oil contracts with no intervention from the central government in Baghdad, and an increase in the oil revenues allocated for Kurdistan region from the present 17 percent up to 20 percent of the total oil revenues in the whole Iraq.

I don't see any reference to 40% distribution (it says 20%) and there is no reference to the constitution needing amendments so I don't think that is an issue. My understanding is that the primary objection from the Kurds has to do with their autonomy in negotiating and signing contracts with the oil companies regarding the fields in their province.

Originally Posted by BrabusSV12S

Thanks for the post Buddyboy and for the translation AlwaysDreaming. This is good news.... or is it? I'm hoping that some of you legal experts can help me with this dilema. I remember seeing an article a few weeks ago talking about a conflict between the HCL and the Iraqi constitution as regards the percentages of the distribution of the oil money. As we see in this article posted by Buddyboy the HCL dictates that the oil money is distributed evenly between the Kurds, Shiites and Sunnis. However, my understanding is that the Constitution states that the distribution is 40% to the Kurds and then the rest is somehow cut between the shiites and the Sunnis. I certainly hope that I'm wrong about this. However, based on how they have run everything else it would not surprise me if they didn't realize that these differences were issues until recently. I'm hoping that someone with more legal background can address this. I hope that this has already been addressed by the Iraqis and that amendments to the Constitution will not be required. If so, we could be looking at MONTHS of delay of the enactment of the HCL and FIL.

Let me know what you think.

Brabus

As I was looking for your post to add AlwaysDreaming's post to it. I seen that you had quoted it. Good. This post by her/him I was going to use as reference that I used this moring with a group verifing that what was thought to be true, was now in print with a article.

OK, this is my understanding. It will have no effect on the hold up of the for this to be done. My understanding is, if there is a problem in any of the laws, prior or after the WTO meeting on the 7th of Feb that have to be done then. A admendment will just be added. Again, this is my understanding of what will happen in case of a change needed.

Originally Posted by BrabusSV12S

IS THERE A PROBLEM HERE?

I didn't get a response to my previous post so, I thought I'd try again. I have been informed by someone with contacts that there is a conflict between the HCL and the Constitution and that this will need to be amended prior to the HCL and FIL being enacted. I've been told that this could take MONTHS. Has this ever been addressed on the forum. I do remember reading something about this a few weeks ago and I think it was just blown off by everyone. I can't find the article. I'm hoping that this conflict is being addressed but, it would surprise me if they thought that far ahead. Any thoughts?

Brabus

Good question,

As confusing as it has been made out to be with all the recycled news articles of late, the issue involving HCL has always been related to constitutional issues, hence, amendments are being mentioned. The HCL has been set since introduced by the Kurd's, but the issue has been based on existing oil, vs. yet to be found oil, and this is an issue with how constitution is written, not the HCL.

HCL is about fair distribution issues, percentages and where all profits go and are handled. The oil within Kurdistan is a constiturional issue of control and who has the right to contract who are determined by same, but revenues still go to central gov. Since Kurd's drafter HCL to start with, and since the constitution was written before HCL, amendments are proposed, so this is where it gets confusing when reading all these recycled news articles which do not break out these issues clearly enough for proper translations. The HCL is set in stone, the constitution is what needs to be ammended to coordinate with HCL agreement. Hope that clears it up a little better for you.

Good luck to all, Mike

Sure Glad you here. That is a Much Better answer to the question. Set in Stone. Changes will be by Admendents added. Thanks.

Iraq invites neighboring countries for a meeting on the country's security
Posted 2/1/2007 6:02 AM ET E-mail | Save | Print | Subscribe to stories like this



BAGHDAD (AP) — Iraq invited officials from Iran, Syria and other neighboring nations to Baghdad next month to discuss the security situation in the country, a government official said Thursday.
The Foreign Ministry official, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to disclose the information, said the talks will be the first of 10 such meetings to take place in the Iraqi capital. Iran was the venue for the last meeting in July.

Along with Iran and Syria, Iraq has invited Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Turkey to the discussions. The Arab League, Organization of Islamic Conference and the United Nations also have been asked to attend, the official said.

The United States and the Iraqi government have accused Syria of allowing foreign fighters to cross into Iraq and fight coalition and Iraqi forces. The U.S. has accused Iran of giving support to Shiite militias.

Both countries deny the charges.

Syrian President Bashar Assad stressed his country's eagerness to promote Iraq's security, stability and territorial unity during a meeting with Sheik Harith al-Dhari, head of the powerful Sunni Association of Muslim Scholars in Iraq, the official Syrian Arab News Agency report Thursday

Al-Maliki: Iraq won't be battleground for U.S., Iran
POSTED: 5:35 a.m. EST, February 1, 2007
Story Highlights• NEW: U.S. soldier dies after Anbar battle, raising the monthly toll to 86
• NEW: Language in GOP senator's anti-surge resolution lures Democratic support
• Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki says Iran attacks U.S. forces in Iraq
• Al-Maliki urges Iran, U.S. not to conduct proxy war in Iraq

Adjust font size:
BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Iraq's prime minister said Wednesday he's sure Iran is behind some attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq and he won't allow his country to be a battleground for the two nations.

"We have told the Iranians and the Americans, 'We know that you have a problem with each other, but we are asking you, please solve your problems outside Iraq,' " Nuri al-Maliki told CNN.

"We will not accept Iran to use Iraq to attack the American forces," al-Maliki said Wednesday in an exclusive interview with CNN. (Read more of al-Maliki interview)

"We don't want the American forces to take Iraq as a field to attack Iran or Syria," he added.

Asked about the role of Iran in Iraq, al-Maliki said he was confident that Iranian influence was behind attacks on U.S. forces. "It exists, and I assure you it exists," he said.

Iranian-U.S. tensions have been ratcheted up recently, with two U.S. officials theorizing about the possibility that Iran was involved in a January 20 attack that killed five U.S. soldiers.

Two officials from separate U.S. government agencies said Tuesday the Pentagon is investigating whether the attack on a military compound in Karbala was carried out by Iranians or Iranian-trained operatives.

"People are looking at it seriously," one of the officials said, adding that the Iranian connection was a leading theory in the investigation.

The second official said: "We believe it's possible the executors of the attack were Iranian or Iranian-trained."

The five soldiers were abducted and killed in the sophisticated attack by men wearing American-style uniforms, according to U.S. military reports. (Watch how attackers got into the compound )

Both officials stressed the Iranian-involvement theory is only a preliminary view, and there is no conclusion. They agreed this possibility is under consideration because of the sophistication of the attack and the level of coordination.

"This was beyond what we have seen militias or foreign fighters do," the second official said.

Al-Maliki said the Americans were basing their hunches about Iranian activities in Iraq on intelligence they've amassed.

Suggestions of Iranian involvement in the Karbala attack are part of a larger confrontation between Iran and the United States.

Washington accuses Tehran of fomenting terror attacks worldwide and pursuing a nuclear program that could lead to the development of weaponry. Iran has denied those assertions. (Watch what could happen if the U.S. opts to strike Iran )

The Bush administration has authorized U.S. forces to kill or capture Iranian agents plotting attacks in Iraq, a U.S. national security official said last week. The policy, approved by President Bush in the last couple of months, is aimed at Iranian agents planning attacks with Iraqi militiamen, the official said.

Bush has said that he has no problem with the policy, if it protects U.S. soldiers. (Full story)

U.S. monthly death toll hits 86
A U.S. soldier died Thursday of "wounds sustained due to enemy action" while on active duty in Iraq's Anbar province on Tuesday, the U.S. military said.

The death brings the number of U.S. military personnel killed in Iraq this month to 86 and throughout the nearly four-year-old war to 3,079. Seven civilian contractors of the Defense Department also have been killed.

On Thursday, six passengers were killed and eight more were wounded when a bomb blast ripped through a bus on a commercial street in a Shiite neighborhood in central Baghdad, a Baghdad police official said.

North of Baghdad in a Sunni neighborhood, one Iraqi was killed and four others were wounded when two mortar rounds slammed into a street in Adhamiya Thursday morning, a Baghdad police official said.

A day earlier, 10 mortar rounds slammed into the same neighborhood, killing four and wounding 20.

In another attack, one person was killed and three others were wounded when a roadside bomb exploded in a commercial area in central Baghdad, police said.

Other developments

The U.S. military killed four insurgents who appeared to be placing bombs along roads northwest of Baghdad in two airstrikes Wednesday afternoon, a U.S. military statement said.


The U.S. military said coalition forces killed a person tied to foreign-fighter activities and detained 29 suspected terrorists Thursday during a series of raids launched throughout the capital and in the country's western and northern regions. Those arrested were suspected of planting roadside bombs, al Qaeda-linked kidnappings and other terrorist activities -- such as funding Iraq's insurgency and hijacking vehicles, the military said.


Prominent senators from each party agreed Wednesday to support a resolution that says the Senate "disagrees" with Bush's troop increase for Iraq. The move increases the chances that a measure chiefly sponsored by Republican Sen. John Warner can win the necessary 60 votes for passage. Compromise language attracted the support of Democratic Sens. Carl Levin and Joe Biden, who had been pushing a more strongly worded resolution

Minister of Industry and Minerals discusses with major American companies the opportunities of industrial investment in Iraq
Minister of Industry and Minerals discusses with major American companies the opportunities of industrial investment in Iraq
Translated by IRAQdirectory.com - [01/02/2007]


Minister of Industry and Minerals, Mr. Fawzi Franzo Hareeri, discussed with major American companies the opportunities of industrial investment during his tour in the United States of America. He called on those companies to be initiative and make the necessary surveys and the economic and technical evaluations for industrial projects during the first half of this year after to being agreed on, then start implementing them during the second half of the same year. The Minister of Industry and Minerals had submitted a detailed explanation about the orientations of the Iraqi government and the Ministry of Industry in the area of encouraging investment, building new productive factories, reconstructing the companies affiliated with the Ministry and rehabilitating the production lines in them to take advantage of the available raw materials, the scientific expertise and the existing skills in the Ministry. the Minister pointed out that there important regions throughout Iraq ready for investment, emphasizing that the initiative of the American companies will have a special assessment by the Ministry of Industry, since it reflects the seriousness and commitment of these companies to invest in these vital and important projects for the Iraqi economy