davidw19

If you click on the link... it is dated TODAY.... December 7, 2011. ... at the TOP. Thanks for the nod Snakes251... IDIOT.... your funny. Old or not, its in TODAY'S Daily Mail.

sorry... dated 12-7-2011 at the top of the article online... my apologies... had the couple of the year "Stodden & Hutchison making out in public again" link to the right... thought it was current. Did wonder why it quoted Powell and not Hillarious tho.

Most of the time the UK dailymail isnt much different than TMZ, but today they might have got something? Good news? The UN Security Council voted overwhelmingly today to end 13-year-old sanctions against Iraq and gave the United States and Britain extraordinary powers to run the country and its lucrative oil industry. Despite misgivings by many council members, the 14-0 vote was a victory for the Bush administration, which made some last-minute concessions that opened the door to an independent, albeit limited UN role and the possibility of UN weapons inspectors returning to post-war Iraq. The only opposition came from Syria, which left its seat empty and did not cast a vote in the 15-member council. "The lifting of sanctions marks a momentous event for the people of Iraq," US Ambassador John Negroponte told the council after the vote. "It is time for the Iraqi people to benefit from their natural resources." In Paris, US Secretary of State Colin Powell said, "This is a wonderful day for the people of Iraq." Compromise to reach consensus British Ambassador Sir Jeremy Greenstock, noting the divisiveness on Iraq, said, "The whole United Nations system will hope that the vote which we have just taken marks a return to sustained consensus on one of the most difficult foreign policy issues we have faced." He was referring to the council's earlier refusal, particularly on the part of Russia, China, Germany and France, to authorize the US-led war against Iraq that ousted the government of President Saddam Hussein. All four voted "yes". The final compromise in the seven-page resolution was an agreement by Washington for a Security Council review within 12 months on the implementation of the resolution. But the measure does not need to be renewed and stays in effect until an internationally recognized Iraqi government is established. French Ambassador Jean-Marc de la Sabliere said while the resolution was "not perfect", it provided "a credible framework within which the international community will be able to lend support for the Iraqi people. This is why we supported it." And Germany's UN ambassador, Gunter Pleuger, said bluntly: "This resolution is a compromise." "It does not fulfill every wish of all parties, but as compared to the initial draft of the co-sponsors, we have achieved substantial improvements," he said. Resolution gives power to US The UN sanctions were imposed a few days after Iraq's 1990 invasion of Kuwait. But after Saddam's fall, the United States argued there was no reason for the trade and financial embargoes to continue. The resolution would give the United States and Britain broad powers to run Iraq and sell its oil to fund reconstruction. It would also protect Iraq against lawsuits or attachments of its oil revenues until a permanent Iraqi government is established. Weapons inspectors The United States signalled its willingness this week to have inspectors from the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency, responsible for nuclear materials, return to Iraq. But the Bush administration is not eager for the return of chemical, biological and missile inspectors, commanded by Hans Blix, who has openly challenged some US assertions. Britain, however, appeared to disagree. Greenstock in his speech said among the issues the Security Council would need to take up in "due time" was the future of the inspection commissions "as they relate to the complete disarmament of Iraq under previous resolutions." Before the war, US President George W Bush repeatedly accused Iraq of having illicit weapons of mass destruction and said it would have to be disarmed by force. US teams searching for the dangerous weapons have not yet found them. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-181846/UN-votes-lift-Iraq-sanctions.html#ixzz1fsdjdGiz

How about Southeast Michigan? Detroit Metro area? I called 5/3rd and they do not... called chase ...No.... called a few more... and all are a No. Or possibly online, that is trustworthy?

Dinner for 4 at Chili's in Bagdad.... 2 Large Kibabs, 2 kids Kibabs, drinks, dessert... that will be 53,820 Dinar... Please, and we do not accept any major credit cards.. Nothing wierd about that at all. Kind of reminds me of circa 1989 in Cancun when I ate dinner at the Marriott and the bill totalled 1,234,435 Pesos. Still have the receipt... makes me feel like a high roller.

Correct Rossenbos... The value of the Kuwaiti went to crap when Sadam started bringing it in to Kuwait by the truck loads. Let the Kuwaitis give their own money away for pennies... collect it all back... then cash in. I have a friend that lived in Iraq in 1990 and made a few bucks from the Kuwaiti ordeal. The Nazis tried a similiar thing in WW2 flooding markets with fake currency (the counterfeiters about Salomon Sorowitsch), just as Sadam made his own currency. If I remember the Iraqi dinar was at 3,000 prior to our invasion. I am guessing that is where most are getting the RV of 3.

This is what I have heard has already happened within Iraq. I was not privy to the dinar situation until a week or so ago. After learning about the dinar I wanted to get more info so I asked the man who owns the building I office in and he made a phone call to a relative in Iraq yesterday to find out what was going on, and he said that the 3 zero move to the left was already a done deal and will be implemented by the end of December. I am no guru or hater, I was considering purchaisng some dinar myself and wanted more direct intel.