skeptic1138

When this event never happens (and I assure you it will not) will you question if your religion is real, or will you just take it to mean the prophecy was mis-interpreted?

Yes Hezbollah is as you say. But they are being sent into Syria to fight FOR the Assad government not against them. Is that what you are saying? As for Obama sending weapons I have not seen any evidence of that as yet, we may start to and the EU has recently authorized it as well. I just posted a clarification for those that did NOT go and read the article. That's all. I assume we did the test for one or two reasons, maybe both. We might not have been sure if it would have sufficient penetrating power to work so needed to find out if this was in fact an option. Or we might already have know and did it specifically so the Iranians would know and perhaps encourage them to negotiate a bit more seriously. First the clause in 13303 about things other than the DFI fund says NOTHING in that is related to allowing US citizens to own Dinar, since they had that right (or for any other currency) all along. Further in such documents noting is "understood to mean", everything is spelled out in legal detail. It also does not say anything about a broad legal shield for contractors and mercenaries. The gurus have just run wild with this in an effort to claim owning dinar somehow was planned by Bush. Keep in mind that the Bush administration were the ones that thought the war would last at most six months and cost at most $50B. Their short term plans were wildly wrong and yet folks want to credit them with some ten year plan. No way. Of course Iraq has an interest in IQD, not sure what you meant by that. As for faith and prophecy, you are correct I don't buy a bit of it. The problem with Biblical prophecy is that it is always after the fact. When Iraq does not end up ruling the world, the faithful will just pick a new interpretation of this as they have always done. A Bible prophecy can never be disproved to a believer as they just claim it was incorrectly interpreted and they are all so vague and abstract that many many such interpretations are possible. Nothing I say here will cause you to question your faith, as you did not come to your faith by reasoning. I have no problem with that, to each their own. By the same token claims of prophecy etc that can not remotely stand up to scientific scrutiny will never convince me either. Looking at the multitude of religions and how they have evolved over time, the hypothesis that humans created gods and religinos fits that data quite well. The hypothesis that some one of them is actually correct and the foundation of the universe is some sort of being does not fit that data very well, nor meshes with what (little) we know of cosmology.

Should have been "of course" not "of douse", spell check slipped one past me again...

A few billion dinar?, sure (i.e. a few million dollars) to get new plates made and run off more currency then they usually need for yearly replacement. But the idea that this has to be synced up with the GOI's budget makes no sense as long as both currencies would exist side by side for a year or two, which is always how the RD articles all said it would be as I recall.

Assuming the double negative was not intended, yes I think the IQD can not be the foreign reserve currency for the ME. A reserver currency has to float, and no country that has a single sector and fairly small GDP is likely to float their currency since it opens them to volatility.

Semantics? i.e. meaning, would seem to be important. Points 1 and 2 were just clarifications, no real disputes. Its point 3 about EO 13303 that is more of an issue, since despite its constant surfacing in dinar-land, I don't see the connection. It does reference a few other EOs, so to be sure you would have to go look at those as well, which I did not (though the url I provided does list them all).

A few quick comments. 1) Its hard to keep the players straight in the ME, but as far as I know the Hezbollah fighters have been sent in to support Assad against the oppoisition in Syria. It sounded from your post like you might have that backwards, or maybe I just didn't parse it correctly. 2) We did not destroy a real underground nuclear site, but a mock up of one, i.e. to see if our biggest bunker busting bombs would in fact do the job if need be (and the answer seems to be yes, which is good of course). 3) I think the presidential order you are thinking of is 13303 not 13033. The second one is from Clinton about government pay scales. The first one (13303) is the one constantly claimed to allow dinar investment, but it is only about protecting the DFI fund from liens from law suits. No order is needed to allow a US citizen to purchase any currency they wish as far as I know, and I don't see anything in this order (its only 1 page) impacting such ownership.

You're most welcome.

Of course that doc also says the CBI's primary goal is price stability not appreciation.

If the goal is knowledge, then a big part of that is knowing what is true (or at least might be true) and what is false. Am I not contributing to that by pointing out false statements? If by contributing you mean showing how a huge RV will work, I don't see how it can work, so I can't do that. Specifically on the procedures to alter the exchange rate, it looks to me that the CBI is fully autonomous and need not get permission from the BIS or even the GOI. Read the third page (page 9) of the CBI law http://cbi.iq/documents/CBILAW-EN_f.pdf

Does appending "this is just my opinion" on the end of a post insulate you from all questions? Does it mean that things you claim as facts in support of your opinion are also just your opinion? For example he says early in the OP: Do you read that SWFG meant that to be read as "I'm going to make a guess as to the process, but its just my opinion and not based on any actual facts"? I don't think so. It seems clear he is stating a fact, one I dispute specifically around the claimed role of the BIS. So I asked him for some supporting evidence. None has been offered (or was offered when he first posted this (word for word) back in Jan. Of douse. It was just a figure of speech with an implied "in order to resolve this" appended. I didn't mean to imply SWFG is under some requirement to answer my question.

How is just asking for some evidence that what he claimed (as to the claim that the BIS approves changes in exchange rates) showing animosity? That claim seems very contrary to the roles the BIS provides to central banks as presented on BIS.org . So I asked. No such evidence has been offered and then as a second thought I googled the post and found it is from last Jan. If you read animosity into asking for support for claims people make, I think that is a somewhat unusual usage.

So far, no one has produced a report at all, let alone one from a credible source, that actually makes some sort of estimate about gold in the ground in Iraq. Its just reports of comments made by people such as the one you posted where we have no idea how much translation went into "huge" or what that might actually mean. It also takes a long time to develop a mining industry (i.e. they are large scale industrial operations). So Iraq may well have significant mineral resources, but oil is going to remain the top revenue source. Gold and other minerals getting up to a few billion dollars worth a year (i.e. a few percent of oil revenue) would be a great accomplishment (which I do not mean to minimize). Also while this may seem like a tiny technical detail, there is a an issue of accounts relative to gold deposits that might be mined one day and how that might impact the exchange rate. What dominates the exchange rate for a pegged currency is the money supply compared to the central bank reserves (a bit of which are indeed gold the CBI has bought). But gold from state owned lands (or state owned mineral rights) would (like oil revenue) go to the GOI. That's good for Iraq of course and can be used for any budget item including just giving it to the people (like Qatar does with a portion of its revenue), but it only gets into the CBI reserves if they exchange it for dinars, and that action keeps the money supply and reserves in the same proportion as before this exchange, so it does not impact the rate. I think it might require some sort of special law for the GOI to just give the CBI funds to add to their reserves. Maybe that's possible, but passing any law in Iraq seems somewhat problematic. If Iraq ever goes to a floating exchange regime, and manages to keep the dinar stable when doing so, then a growing minerals industry could positively impact the rate to some extent, but then lots of other factors can influence the rate of floating currencies so I doubt Iraq is going to do so anytime soon at least (say within 10 years).

I guess getting some sort of supporting evidence of the BIS's claimed role here is not going to happen. This OP by SWFG made the rounds of the dinar site last Jan (just pick a whole line, put it in quotes and google for it) and no links or evidence or support of any kind was offered with those either. Oh well.

Just because the gurus claims of a GCR are nonsense doesn't mean that there can't be any changes on the world stage. There are very powerful forces trying to hold the Eurozone together and keep the Euro going, but its possible they might not be successful and at some point there might be some sort of reshuffling. That would be huge, but is nothing like the claimed GCR.