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

Originally Posted by jsfletcher

Well, lets take a pair of shoes, it's a bit easier since bread has multiple ingredients. If shoes are imported and they cost $7.28 to import or 10k dinar at current exchange rate.

Now let say you are Joe Iraqi and have managed to hold onto a 5k note. You can't even buy shoes for your kids, but if they rv at 1:1 it now cost less than 10 dinar to import, that's where the purchasing power comes into play, now joe iraqi can buy plenty of shoes

That's fine for imports. But what would the price of goods be in Iraq? They would eventually come way down because the merchants can import for the new lower cost and pass it on right?

Originally Posted by michaeljordan

That's fine for imports. But what would the price of goods be in Iraq? They would eventually come way down because the merchants can import for the new lower cost and pass it on right?

yes, prices for the stuff that is made at home will be adjusted acoordingly

Originally Posted by One Oar

A Chase update I thought I would share. I live in a suburb west of Oklahoma City. I rarely use the Chase office there as I work on the other side of town and it is more convenient to use the office where the company I work for banks and also where I opened my account and do all of my banking. Anyway, I was off yesterday and doing some holiday shopping right by the branch where I live. I've been in this location maybe twice. I've been considering ordering more Dinar, using the argument "why not just round your holdings up to the next highest round number?" (Sometimes it doesn't take much to justify another purchase). I told the teller I would like to buy some foreign currency, Iraq Dinar. She quickly stated that they do not sell it. I explained that I have purchased it on several locations across town and asked if it was a branch by branch thing. She said she didn't know, but that her branch manager had told all of the staff that they did not sell/were not to sell Iraq Dinar. I promptly left and went to the location I normally deal with. Most of the staff recognizes me when I come in. I went to the teller and ordered my 3 Mill. Making idle conversation, I asked if I was the only one that comes in to buy it there (this is a teller I have dealt with several times). She said yes, and they are not supposed to sell it. I asked why are they selling it to me? She stated because we know you, and the bank manager said it was OK. She said any Iraq Dinar purchase would have to be approved by the bank manager. I asked what if someone came in and wanted to purchase some? She said they wouldn't approve it-they would just tell them that they don't sell it or that it is no longer available. Kind of interesting, don't you think? I feel somewhat priveledged. I'll feel even more that way when they implement the FIL and the HCL and rate goes where it's expected.

do we have anybody on the inside of chase bank, maybe upper branch managemant that can explain this, because it seems very strange to me....

Originally Posted by mike brown

do we have anybody on the inside of chase bank, maybe upper branch managemant that can explain this, because it seems very strange to me....

Strange to say the least. I just picked up yesterday no problem, and I sent a guy from work to the same bank, he ordered for himself no problems, it was his first order.

The Nation
Wed Dec 20, 10:58 AM ET

The Nation -- Listening to the President's press conference just now, something caught my ear. In discussing the new "strategy forward," in Iraq, Bush mentioned that a key to unifying the country would be getting Iraq's new oil law passed. The idea is, I imagine, that once Iraq's new government has figured out how to equitably share oil revenues among various factions, everyone's going to get along just fine. Of course, along with bringing Iraqis together, the new law might just also provide a boon to American energy companies A win-win!

As Antonia Juhasz shows in a new cover story for In These Times (not yet on line), and argued in the LA Times earlier this month, access to oil continues to drive US policy in Iraq:


The Bush administration hired the consultancy firm BearingPoint more than a year ago to advise the Iraqi Oil Ministry on drafting and passing a new national oil law.

Plans for this new law were first made public at a news conference in late 2004 in Washington. Flanked by State Department officials, Iraqi Finance Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi (who is now vice president) explained how this law would open Iraq's oil industry to private foreign investment. This, in turn, would be "very promising to the American investors and to American enterprise, certainly to oil companies." The law would implement production-sharing agreements.

Much to the deep frustration of the U.S. government and American oil companies, that law has still not been passed.

In July, U.S. Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman announced in Baghdad that oil executives told him that their companies would not enter Iraq without passage of the new oil law. Petroleum Economist magazine later reported that U.S. oil companies considered passage of the new oil law more important than increased security when deciding whether to go into business in Iraq.

There are two elephants in the room when it comes to Iraq, and for some reason the establishment press can never quite bring itself to broach the subjects: permanent bases and access to oil. It's fairly clear that Bush is not going to withdraw from Iraq no matter what happens. Part of this is due to the fact that he has decided that as long as we stay in Iraq we can't lose the war, and he doesn't want to lose it. But there's also the not-so-minor fact that if we withdraw from Iraq we'll have a hard time establishing permanent bases and may not have any secure access to the country's oil.

So why is it the word oil never crossed the lips of any of the reporters at today's press conference?

Originally Posted by rvalreadydang

Iraq's oil revenues may generate $ 3500 for every citizen


Said analyst for Texas-based energy Tuesday that the plan accepted in Washington for the distribution of oil wealth of Iraq directly to the Division had put $ 3500 annually in the hands of every Iraqi citizen deep. The analyst said veteran Del Astevz that appreciation based on the oil price of 60 dollars a barrel and production costs ten dollars a barrel and the assumption that the ten million Iraqis will be in the age to qualify for a share of oil wealth for the country. Iraq produced 2.2 million barrels of oil per day and exports 1.5 million barrels, according to the report of a study of Iraq, which was issued earlier this month. Estimates vary, the average annual income in Iraq varies considerably, but in the maximum amount of $ 1500 annually. He said Astevz told Reuters in an interview that the best way to manage the distribution of wealth may be giving money to those who register to participate in the elections and the vote bank account is maintained and thus promotes social participation and stability. He said, "when people understood that the money coming to them, they will seek to protect the resource of income and want to have a government capable of settling disputes." Against says that the distribution of those funds would be difficult because of problems related to corruption and things of transport and communications, but the idea gained adherents discuss with the United States a way to eliminate the chaos that followed the war in 2003, which dropped the dictatorship of Saddam

جريدة المواطن العراقية

WONDER WHAT U.S. STATE THEY GOT THIS IDEA FROM?!?!?!?

Originally Posted by jsfletcher

yes, prices for the stuff that is made at home will be adjusted acoordingly

I appreciate your answers. I am just trying to wrap my head around this. I was mainly trying to figure out the following. Usually, when someone gains another loses. I our case, we would be the ones benefitting by holding dinar. Does anyone get screwed?

Iraq’s Gold Reserves

The CBI vaults contained four tons of gold reserves as of early June 2003. The value of these gold reserves was insignificant in comparison to the bank’s level of cash reserves. CBI began accumulating these gold reserves in 2001 by purchasing gold in relatively small quantities on a frequent basis from Lebanese banks in which the former Iraqi Regime had large foreign currency deposits. As a standard purchase procedure, the respective Lebanese banks supplying the gold would deliver it to the Iraqi Embassy in Beirut for shipment to CBI vaults in Baghdad via diplomatic pouch. The CBI bought gold in amounts ranging from 100 to 500 kilograms per purchase. This amount of gold could be shipped easily by diplomatic pouch. Also, CBI bought gold in small quantities in order to avoid raising the market level of gold in Lebanon and to avoid scrutiny by the US. The Regime did not remove any of the gold from CBI vaults during the war with coalition forces.


The CBI Investment Department Director General Asrar ‘Abd al-Husayn was directly responsible for management of the gold purchases using cash from the overseas accounts in Lebanon. CBI Governor Dr. Isam Rashid al-Huwaysh, however, retained final responsibility for supervision of the gold purchase program.
The Regime implemented the gold purchase in 2001 upon the recommendation of al-Huwaysh and against the opposition of Minister of Finance Hikmat Mizban Ibrahim al-Azzawi. Al-Huwaysh was concerned that Saddam and his sons could easily remove cash reserves whenever they wanted or could easily use the cash reserves in purchasing weapons from foreign suppliers.

Gold, on the other hand, was heavy and could not be easily removed, ensuring that the CBI would retain these reserves, even if the Regime decided to remove the cash reserves. Al-Huwaysh, however, could not use this argument to convince Saddam to begin a gold purchase program, and he instead argued that the gold reserves could not be destroyed in the event of bombing and fire at the bank during a war.

Saddam accepted this latter argument and authorized the gold purchased beginning in 2001. Prior to the outbreak war with coalition forces, the Regime did not have any plan for dispersing the gold upon commencement of hostilities.

The Rafidian Bank central office in Baghdad had an unknown but relatively small quantity of gold in its vault as of 19 March 2003. Under the former Regime, Iraqis were not allowed to sell their gold overseas, but many people attempted to smuggle their personal gold out of Iraq to take advantage of the higher prices in overseas markets and to secure foreign currency. When these smugglers were caught, the government confiscated the gold and put it in the vault of the Rafidian Bank. Iraqi ministries did not retain any gold.


This is an excellent link explaining alot of Saddams ill-gotten-booty, where he stashed it and with whom he stashed it.

Iraq Survey Group Final Report

Cheers!
DayDream

Originally Posted by rkpdwp

They cannot approve anything.I just read that since al-sadar and his bunch
have boycotted the goverment they have not had enough members to have
a quaoram.

theyve got enough without his bunch and then some. problem is the religious fanatics think they gotta go pray everytime theres some pilgrimage to some holy site. i mean i would think allah would want to 'let his people go' so to speak.

YOU THINK THE TIMING OF THIS ISNT SPOT ON?????
WOooHooOttTT!!!!

Originally Posted by sourpickles

Boy, This sure could help things along!!!


BAGHDAD, Iraq - Radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, who heads a militia feared by Iraq's Sunnis, is considering a one-month unilateral cease-fire and may push his followers to rejoin the political process after a three-week boycott, officials close to him said Wednesday.

The issue is expected to come up at a meeting Thursday in the holy city of Najaf between al-Sadr and a delegation representing the seven Shiite groups that form the largest bloc in Iraq's parliament, the Shiite officials said on condition of anonymity because of the secrecy of the talks.

In perhaps an even more important session, the delegation will also sit down with the country's top Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani. Officials from several factions confirmed the planned trip to Najaf.

The visit is intended to allow the Shiite bloc, the United Iraqi Alliance, to work out some of Iraq's biggest political obstacles in front of al-Sistani, and to pressure al-Sadr to rein in his fighters and rejoin politics — or face isolation, participants said.

Until the walkout, al-Sadr's faction had been an integral part of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's governing coalition. Cabinet ministers and legislators who belong to al-Sadr's movement called the boycott after al-Maliki met with President Bush in Jordan three weeks ago. Al-Sadr's militia and its offshoots have been increasingly blamed for sectarian attacks.

As violence rages across Baghdad and much of Iraq, a new coalition taking shape among Shiites, Kurds and one Sunni party is seen as a last-ditch effort to form a government across sectarian divisions that have split the country. While al-Sadr's movement would not be part of this coalition, such an alliance — which reportedly is supported by the Bush administration — might pressure the radical cleric to soften his stance.

In Thursday's meeting, the group wants to assure al-Sistani that the new coalition would not break apart the Shiite bloc, said officials from several Shiite parties. Potential members of the coalition said they have been negotiating for two weeks, and now want the blessing of al-Sistani, whose word many Shiites consider binding.

The movement is backed by the U.S. government, said Sami al-Askari, a member of the Dawa party and an adviser to al-Maliki.

"I met the American ambassador in Baghdad and he named this front the 'front of the moderates,' and they (the Americans) support it," al-Askari said.

The U.S. Embassy in Baghdad could not comment on the ambassador's meeting or his position on the possible coalition deal.

However, two prominent figures in the proposed coalition went to Washington to meet Bush separately in the past three weeks: Tarek al-Hashemi of the Sunni Iraqi Islamic Party and Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, known as SCIRI. The U.S. supports two other potential members, the Kurdish Democratic Party and President Jalal Talabani's Patriotic Union of Kurdistan.

"The U.S. wants to see an Iraq that is united, stable, democratic and prosperous. We will continue to work with the democratically elected government of Iraq to reach this goal by improving security, promoting national reconciliation and the rule of law and helping the Iraqis deliver essential services," U.S. Embassy spokesman Lou Fintor said.

After meeting al-Sistani, the delegation will visit al-Sadr to try to persuade him to tell his followers to return to politics, and to assure him that the new coalition — still being completed — will not isolate his movement, said officials from several factions, including al-Sadr's movement.

"Tomorrow we will visit Grand Ayatollah al-Sistani and Muqtada al-Sadr, though the (coalition) front has not yet been formed, due to the demands of the Iraqi Islamic Party," al-Askari said.

His and al-Maliki's Dawa faction has expressed willingness to join the coalition, but fears it could weaken the Shiite United Iraqi Alliance, Dawa officials said on condition of anonymity because the deal was not final.

"We will inform al-Sistani about the latest developments and assure Muqtada al-Sadr that he will not be sidelined from the political process. We want him to change his mind and be a part of that process," al-Askari told The Associated Press.

Officials close to al-Sadr said they believe the firebrand cleric and his followers would turn a friendly ear to the coalition, out of fear of being sidelined in the future.

Fearing such political isolation as well as possible attack by U.S. forces, al-Sadr will secretly order his Mahdi Army militia to abide by a one-month halt in fighting, said a Shiite politician, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the delicacy of the negotiations. He did not give further details.

Another official close to al-Sadr did not speak about the planned truce directly, but said when asked about it that "the security situation will improve in the coming month."

Even if al-Sadr commands his militia, the Madhi Army, to halt sectarian attacks for a month, questions remain as to whether violence would decrease. The militia is believed to be increasingly fragmented, with some factions no longer reporting to him, and a call for a truce could further divide it.

In exchange for a halt in fighting, al-Sadr's followers want officials from al-Hakim's Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq to make a promise in front of al-Sistani that they will not sideline al-Sadr's movement, said a member of al-Sadr's group.

The Shiite, Kurdish and Sunni coalition was not a done deal, though. Several Shiites complained about conditions set by the Sunni Iraqi Islamic Party, which they said could jeopardize an agreement.

"The demands of the Iraqi Islamic Party are not logical and it is hard to implement them," said Humam Hamoudi, a SCIRI lawmaker. For example, the Sunni party wants all checkpoints leading to and from Baghdad to have an equal number of Shiite and Sunni guards, he said.

Cleric weighs 1-month cease-fire in Iraq - Yahoo! News