Thread: Iraq/Dinar News. 09/05 to 01/14/07

Originally Posted by Wm.Knowles

I would like to respond to a question I received as a PM. What is your idea about the RV rate and do they (CBI) know about all of us that have invested in dinar?
In thinking about these questions I remembered that while in the securities business I witnessed many bankers selling their bonds with only slight increases in appreciation. I learned that economic behavior changes at different price levels. What this means to us is the fact that the CBI is caught between two forces. Pressure to increase the purchasing power of the dinar for the Iraqi people and still be able to purchase dinar from the economy (especially outside of Iraq) and retire as much of the outsanding dinar as possible as cheaply as possible. I think we might want to adjust our thinking about what a reevaluation truly is. Up until now many of us have been considering a reevaluation as singular event. Lets start the discussion that an RV is a process. A process where the CBI (who knows their is an abundance of currency outside of Iraq) will attempt an initial RV that will satisfy both the increase in purchasing power, but low enough to retreive/remove as much currency from the outside investors as possible. If I was the President of the CBI, Why would I instantly RV at double digits when I can pobably remove a "big bunch" of dinar and only pay a single digit figure? As the President, I can always raise the exchange rate figure. So, how many of you would sell a million dinar if the initial RV was only .05 cents? Why should I pay more? While I think the future for this investment is exceptional, I think we are obligated to explore the possibilities so as to be prepared. Once there is an RV, expect them to turn their attention to the investors on the outside and remove as much of that pool of currency as cheaply as possible. Hate to sound cynical, but bankers are not social workers and their perception is strickly on the money.

I'm quite sure the amount of IQD outside Iraq will not matter one bit. It's all set. Iraq will get the exchange rate it wants. The currency in circulation is due to the fact that Iraq's a cash based society and considering the pathetic exchange rate, 19T is only $12B at the 1470 exchange rate. $12B covering a population of 26.8 million. No ATMs, no checkbooks, no debit cards. That's ultra conservative. The CBI doesn't need to worry about the currency in circulation inside Iraq just to significantly increase the exchange rate of the IQD. The IQD is the national currency of Iraq, used in day to day business and purchase of goods and services in IRaq. The IQD is still king and will always be king in Iraq, especially once the exchange rate skyrockets. It will surely do the Iraqi economy alot of good since imports will be cheaper. They don't have to worry about the increased price of their export, since we all know their major export is oil. Oil that the entire world needs. As far as the IQD outside Iraq, this is already taken cared of and set in stone. It's all good. The time has come. Sit back and enjoy the ride.

Originally Posted by frathousemicrowave

When can we say enough is enough with this guy?
Anyone feel that Rolclub is getting its own Fab 5?

Its called the ignore button

I thought the saying was:

Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day,
teach him how to fish and he'll sit in the
boat and drink beer all day.

Originally Posted by track88

I thought the saying was:

Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day,
teach him how to fish and he'll sit in the
boat and drink beer all day.

Was my wife talking about me again?????

Hey fishing is a difficult task...a little refreshment so you don't get dehydrated isn't a bad thing!!!

Help me RR, I’m confused. The first time you told this story on Aug. 30, 2006 on the IIF you said it was your grandfather, now this time you tell the story it was your father? So which one was it?

Thanks,
Boo

Today you said...

Originally Posted by RollsRoyce

Don't get yourselves into a frazzle re: the larger notes . . .

Unless they *change & reprint* [which everyone here believes they WILL NOT due], they will always be good . . .

In 1978 We found a bunch of Post WW2 D-Marks after my Father passed away . . . this included many large denominations . . .

We decided to take them to Germany [W. Germany @ that time], and they fiddled around for a couple days verifying them / & then handed us a Cashiers Check in US$. . .

As of 3PM [EST], NO 10K YET . . . and talk on the streets included no mention of it . . . lately . . . as far as we've been able to detect . . .

Best to all . . . RR . . .

Back on Aug. 30, 2006 on the IIF you stated and I quote...

8/30/06 Post 102

I do not expect a 10K Reval, in fact a 30% R.O.I. would be just peachy . . . & I have a very tiny amount of my portfolio invested in this . . . I have 5 other RR's . . .

I guess the fact that when we found a box of 1946 D-Marks in my Grandfather's attic after he died . . . helped to push me into this *curiosity* . . . and by the way I do appreciate your candor, and your attempt to educate . . .

Its just that with your divest, why would you . . . CARE . . . I guess is what I mean . . .

As of October 19, the total IQD in circulation is 14.3T. 4.8T are in banks and 9.5T outside of banks. It's probably much smaller now since the CBI has been on a massive USD auction spree. My take on this, is they're reducing the amount of currency in circulation in preparation for a significant reval. They're reducing the amount in circulation to curb possible inflationary phenomenon that may occur because of the significant increase in exchange rate. Not because of the bogus idea of the need to back the currency in circulation with reserves just to reval. Too much currency at a higher exchange rate chasing the same goods will surely result in increased inflationary conditions.

I thought that this was an interesting "timeline" for what Iraq may be dealing with. It is one of the main reasons that Iraq needs to have everything done and in place for the meeting December 12th. They CANNOT afford to make a blunder on this. Everything needs to be in place and ready to go. If they are to release this currency onto the world market they need to made ABSOLUTELY SURE that there are no errors for the RV. If the dinar decreases in value after the RV they are positioned to lose many of their much needed heavy duty investors. They are making sure that they have enough oil contracts in place and the proper laws and legislation ENACTED for the RV to be successful.

They need to prove to the world that they are willing and CAPABLE of taking care of themselves. They will have a rallying point (IMO) to join together and allow for a peaceful (as peaceful as it can get in the Middle East) and prosperous Iraq.

They have the means and the ability to create a world power with their country. Once the profit sharing begins from the revenues of the Oil Production this will calm quite a few people down. I highly doubt that an 18 year old will be as willing to strap a bomb on himself when he has some money in his pocket and some of those western indulgences that he has come to have access to.

Correct me if I am wrong but isn't greed the most powerful motivator when trying to get something done???

I know that I wouldn't allow someone to screw with my income. The more relative calm they achieve the more the oil production will prosper. The more oil production the larger the profit margin. The larger the margin the wealthier EVERY SINGLE PERSON IN IRAQ WILL BE.

Greed can conquer all, even religion.

The interests at play in Iraq | Iraq Updates

International Relations

The interests at play in Iraq
By Michael Jansen

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

16 November 2006 (Jordan Times)
It is one of the many paradoxes of his administration that George W. Bush should refuse to have a direct dialogue with Iran because, after all, he installed in government in Baghdad Tehran's Iraqi creatures and clients. If logic were to be applied, long confidential conversations with Tehran would be but mandatory. But the Bush administration does not operate on the basis of logic.

For instance, early this week, Bush bluntly dismissed calls for major policy changes in Iraq based on the recommendations of the Baker-Hamilton commission, including a proposal for his administration to engage both Tehran and Damascus in an effort to secure their support for the pacification and stabilisation of Iraq. Subsequently, it was announced that the administration is conducting its own review of the situation in Iraq which will be ready in mid-December when the Baker-Hamilton commission releases its report.

Bush's reaction to calls for change comes from the gut rather from the head. He does not like to be told what to do, even though those doing the telling may be older, more experienced and wiser than he is. Therefore, he is very likely to ignore the entire package of ideas put forward by this commission in favour of the survey being prepared under the watchful eye of his secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice.

Bush the younger can be expected to stick with the line put forward by his cozy clique of like-minded advisers (Rice, Vice President Dick Cheney and former Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld). Bush does not lend an ear to people who raise his administration's embarrassing failures in Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine. Failures which have made him, almost certainly, the biggest disaster in the White House for many generations.

Having put into power Iran's creation, the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), and client, the Dawa party of Prime Minister Nuri Maliki, it is illogical for Bush to refuse to talk to the Lebanese Shiite Hizbollah movement or deal with the Palestinian Hamas organisation. Hizbollah is far more moderate and well intentioned than SCIRI and has a real grassroots presence in Lebanon, unlike SCIRI and Dawa in Iraq. This is also true of Hamas in Palestine.

The problem, of course, with Hizbollah and Hamas is that they challenge Israel and its illegal and brutal occupation of Arab land while SCIRI and Dawa do not. Indeed, they readily accommodated themselves to an alliance with Israel's sole global supporter. Therefore, they are, as far as the Bush administration is concerned, "good" fundamentalists. "Bad" fundamentalists are distinguished by their negative attitude to Israel and determination to liberate territory conquered, controlled and settled by Israel.

Since, on the political front, Hamas is backed by Syria and Hizbollah by both Syria and Iran, these two countries are considered beyond the pale by Bush. This means that until he leaves the White House, there will be only cosmetic changes in US policy on Iraq.

On the one hand, Bush, who is all too clearly a deeply unsettled personality, cannot admit to failure. On the other, the Democrats who are set to take power in the legislature do not have a common policy or a coherent plan for Iraq. While a few seasoned representatives, like Carl Levin of Michigan, have rather radical ideas on Iraq — he seeks to begin withdrawing US troops by mid-2007 — others, particularly neophytes with a conservative rather than a liberal bent, do not wish to stir controversy in their constituencies by taking a strong line on Iraq. Indeed, many of the newcomers — who belong to right-wing evangelical Christian churches and reject gun control and abortion — may have more in common with the Republicans than fellow Democrats. Sooner rather than later the Democrats, like the Republicans earlier on, will discover there is very little the US can do in Iraq to halt its slide to perdition.

The one idea the Democrats are united on is to call for a staged withdrawal of US troops — leaving the time frame vague — in order to put pressure on the current Iraqi government to impose law and order by dissolving and disarming the Shiite militias which are engaging in sectarian cleansing and murder. But the government, headed by a leading Dawa figure, Maliki, is in no position to do this. He depends on the backing of SCIRI and the movement of Moqtada Sadr, each with its own militia and sectarian political agenda.

The militia-less Dawa has no muscle and a limited popular constituency. An early, even staged US military pull-out would, almost certainly, lead to all out communal warfare pitting Shiite against Sunnis and Arabs and Turkmen against Kurds. Withdrawal is not the solution.

A few Democrats and Republicans would like the administration to send more troops to Iraq. But this is not an option. The current deployment in Iraq of 147,000-150,000 troops cannot be transformed into a really effective peace-keeping force by the addition of penny packets of 5,000, 10,000 or 20,000 troops. What is needed is a doubling or trebling of the military commitment. But the US does not have the troops to meet the demands of Iraq. Furthermore, troops already on the ground do not have adequate equipment, so even if more soldiers were available, they would lack weapons, flack jackets, armoured vehicles, and communication equipment, reducing their ability to cope with well-armed Iraqi opponents.

Putting pressure on Bush to talk to Iran and Syria, in line with the recommendations of the Baker-Hamilton commission, will not solve Iraq's problems. Neither Tehran nor Damascus have a magic formula for ending the Iraqi nationalist and fundamentalist insurgency, curbing the violence of Shiite militias, extirpating Al Qaeda in Iraq, or containing Kurdish territorial and oil field ambitions in the north.

In spite of US allegations that Iran and Syria seek to stir up the situation in Iraq, these countries greatly fear a spillover of Iraq's civil conflict and the influx of refugees fleeing Iraq. These two neighbours, far more than the distant, domineering US, want a stable, strong, independent Iraq capable of maintaining law and order within its borders and defending its own territory. But they also want an Iraq free of US occupation forces and without US military bases.

Once they look seriously at their options, the divided Democrats are certain to opt for warfare against the Republicans rather than an all-out effort to wipe out perpetrators of violence in Iraq. Indeed, some Democratic stalwarts have already embarked on political campaigns to rake over intelligence and other data in the Bush administration's dossier justifying its war on Iraq.

The Democrats will also look into incompetent handling of the occupation, failure to reconstruct the country, and inability to contain the insurgency and tame the Shiite and Kurdish militias. While Bush completes his last two years in office as a lame-duck president, the Democrats will find it far more profitable to attack him and his record than try to fix shattered Iraq.

Its collapse into chaos and anarchy can only boost the Democrat's congressional and presidential prospects for 2008. Some Democrats may even calculate that the greater the disarray in Iraq, the greater their chances to send their candidate to the White House in two years' time.

Originally Posted by boogirl

Help me RR, I’m confused. The first time you told this story on Aug. 30, 2006 on the IIF you said it was your grandfather, now this time you tell the story it was your father? So which one was it?

Thanks,
Boo

Today you said...




Back on Aug. 30, 2006 on the IIF you stated and I quote...

C'mon now boogirl. It's too obvious, this is not the first slip. Enuff said.

Fellow Dinar Investors,

First of all let me say that I have read ALL of Mr. Knowles posts. I believe that he might be a little more on the conservative side than most, but his points are valid.

When I first got into this venture the idea of the Dinar going to a penny floored me. WOW, 10 times on my investment? Where else could you get that kind of return? And even though the rate was really closer to .32 cents when we invaded, I couldn’t even imagine the possibility that my $1,000 investment could turn into $320,000. That was just not possible!!!

Now here it is 2 years later and I toy with the idea that it could open at $1.47…. Have I gone mad????

However, if Sunday comes along and the CBI posts new rates at .32 cents then are we really going to get on this forum and write about how pissed we are?

I mean, really… If your buddy come up to you and say, “Hey, I heard the Dinar opened up at .32 cents, doesn’t that make you a millionaire?” Are you going scoff and say, “Yeah, but it should have been more…..” as you pout and walk off?

When I sit back and really think about what has occurred in Iraq, and that many of our men and woman have died over there, I get humbled real fast. Yes this is a great investment, and yes, if we didn’t get involved, someone else would. I just think that sometimes we (myself included) lose our perspective.

Just my opinion..

Dan “Apollo”
CEO
Ompus / FreeDinar

Originally Posted by "GK"

As of October 19, the total IQD in circulation is 14.3T. 4.8T are in banks and 9.5T outside of banks. It's probably much smaller now since the CBI has been on a massive USD auction spree. My take on this, is they're reducing the amount of currency in circulation in preparation for a significant reval. They're reducing the amount in circulation to curb possible inflationary phenomenon that may occur because of the significant increase in exchange rate. Not because of the bogus idea of the need to back the currency in circulation with reserves just to reval. Too much currency at a higher exchange rate chasing the same goods will surely result in increased inflationary conditions.

GK,

I wonder if you could provide where you got those numbers? I am not disputing them, but would like to see the source of information. It could shed some light on their current reserves and exactly how long they have been pulling Dinar back in. The CBI site has some spreadsheets, but alas, they are difficult to read at best.

And the .pdf only shows totals of the daily auctions. Unless you were saving the main auction page everyday (of which I have just started) there is no way that I know of to really see the hard numbers.

Thanks,

Dan