Truck and Barter

Comments

---

Sara wrote:

Here is something interesting..
Another article saying that the Maliki, Shiite, Kurdish alliance gives them a majority in parliament.
Quote:

Iraq's Sunni Leadership Joins Reconciliation Talks
Updated Aug 20, 2007 21:08 KST

In Iraq, Sunni leaders have been meeting with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and members of a new Shi'ite, Kurdish alliance in hopes of resolving some of the differences that have blocked political progress in the country.

Days after Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki announced a Shi'ite, Kurdish political alliance that would give his government a 181-seat majority in parliament, Sunni leaders agreed to talk about about their differences. Ammar Al Hakim with the Shi'ite party, the Supreme Iraqi Islamic Council, said this is a step in the right direction.

He says he hopes the talks will overcome differences and work to bring all the parties to serve in a national government.

Television news reports in Baghdad said the talks, which included Iraq's president Jalal Talabani, a Kurd, resumed on Sunday and that the Iraqi leaders agreed on an agenda for a summit aimed at saving the country's crumbling unity government.

The Sunni political party of Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi, the Iraqi Accordance Front Party, withdrew earlier this month from Mr. Maliki's cabinet, effectively blocking the prospect of political reconciliation among Sunni, Shi'ite and Kurdish parties.

Hashemi attended Saturday's meeting but so far has not announced his party's return to the government.

Sunni leaders have accused Mr. Maliki's government of marginalizing them. Key areas of contention include the sharing of oil revenues and easing restrictions on former members of Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath party so they can serve in the army or civil service.

Salim al-Jubori with the Accordance Front says the talks do not necessarily signal a political breakthrough.

He says the discussion so far has been aimed at fixing what he calls political mistakes of the past, but they do not indicate a return by the Sunni Front to Mr. Maliki's political alliance.

http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200708/200708200033.html

And YET, this article published today says that Sadr says there is an imminent collapse because Maliki won't give the other interested political parties (which presumably they need for a true majority) what they want. That can only mean that HE thinks that they do not have a majority, otherwise he would be saying they will push it all through.. and he would be complaining about them being puppets of the Americans, etc.

Report: Muqtada al-Sadr says Iraq's government is near its end
The Associated PressPublished: August 20, 2007

LONDON: A top Iraqi Shiite militia leader predicted Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's government was nearing its end.

Cleric Muqtada al-Sadr told The Independent newspaper that al-Maliki's government was on the brink of collapse, despite efforts to bolster its base of support.

"Al-Maliki's government will not survive because he has proven that he will not work with important elements of the Iraqi people," the cleric was quoted by the newspaper as saying.

"The prime minister is a tool for the Americans, and people see that clearly. It will probably be the Americans who decide to change him when they realize he has failed. We don't have a democracy here, we have a foreign occupation."

Al-Sadr had been among al-Maliki's strongest supporters. However, he broke with al-Maliki, a fellow Shiite, in April and withdrew his five supporters from the Iraqi Cabinet to protest the prime minister's refusal to demand a timetable for the pullout of U.S. forces from Iraq.

He rejected recent reports that he had fled to Iran and denied claims his forces had requested help from Tehran.

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/08/20/europe/EU-GEN-Britain-Al-Sadr.php

-- August 20, 2007 2:33 PM ∞

---

Anonymous wrote:

eweee me first me first ..... well I really can't think of nothing to say but thanks anyway

-- August 20, 2007 2:33 PM ∞

---

cornish boy wrote:

wow :)

-- August 20, 2007 2:40 PM ∞

---

cornish boy wrote:

Computer program reveals FBI, CIA edited Wikipedia entries http://en.rian.ru/world/20070817/72026973.html

-- August 20, 2007 2:48 PM ∞

---

cornish boy wrote:

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

Experts : Natural Gas enormous wealth Mahdoreh

They need to draft separated from the oil giant

Source : Sabah Al-19/08/2007

Given the growing importance of natural gas as an important source of the vital and reliable sources of energy to solve the energy crisis facing the world, has been this important resource ((gas)) for the burning of waste at the sight of people without wealth of the owner doing nothing to stop this waste, because the profits that have been achieved by international oil companies from behind the exploitation of oil and obtained cheaply not paid to think of how to invest ((natural gas)) associated with oil or preserved, and even in the period in which Iraq was able to sell oil and invest in national and free the projects extraction ((natural gas)), separated from the crude oil, not giant projects with higher returns Alstratigi and placed sources ((natural gas)), energy experts have identified two main sources of this important resource, the first natural gas produced from gas reservoirs only these reservoirs near ((oil reservoirs)) and the second source of natural gas associated with oil-gas facilities for crude oil accounts for a large share of world production of natural gas, and this is due to the enormity of the world's oil production, energy experts pointed to enjoy ((natural gas)) much of the economic benefits the rich and ease of use with high content of fuel, the production and consumption in the world has evolved rapidly since the beginning of the last century, due this development in the production of natural gas to the evolution of world oil production and the discovery of huge deposits of natural gas ..

Energy experts identified the features of this period in Iraq in obtaining natural gas that it is difficult and tough where international oil companies controlled oil production by the combustion and waste of natural gas is not unprecedented, de****e the fact that successive governments in Iraq to intervene for the purpose of investment, but to no avail, since the oil companies and strongly opposes the natural gas investment grounds that the investment Costs of natural gas high compared Baclav production (crude oil production) cheap However, the companies were benefiting from the natural gas as an energy source used in the production process, moving within areas of oil investment, as they used in the recent period of privileges in the process of pumping Section him in the fields to maintain the oil wells inside, as well as some small enterprises engaged in the provision of small quantities of liquid gas for household uses, and because of these conditions were large quantities of natural gas to burn waste, estimated lineage b 85-90 % of the associated gas of oil and especially during the period of 1932-1973 years of the last century ..

Energy experts explained that natural gas production witnessed a remarkable improvement due to the high rates of oil production, particularly after 1973, but experts noted that the increase in the quantities of natural gas used was steady, experts attributed this increase to the success of the plan developed in the oil sector in that period for the investment of all gas the product in the country and not burn it and benefit from it in nurturing major development projects such as the petrochemical industries and the Iron and Steel Complex and aluminum factory and investment project phosphate and other other projects, as well as the use of natural gas to fuel electric power generating stations and expansion of the electricity industry in the manufacture of gas, especially for household consumption . energy experts explained that supports the success of this stage in the natural gas investment due to the completion of important projects, such as ((sulfur recovery)) in Kirkuk and the increasing production of liquid gas in Taji and production units in each of the Al-Dawra refinery, Basra and the implementation of projects for the exploitation of natural gas for power generation electrical and building liquefied gas production plant in the southern fields.

Energy experts pointed out that this remarkable development in the areas of production and natural gas investment did not continue its path has been true of many industrial enterprises specializing in the separation of natural gas from crude oil to a complete standstill because of the political changes that have taken place in the country, with multiple wars against the country, which led to disruption supplier President ((oil)) as a result of the difficult circumstances of the embargo and the lack of access relevant technical equipment spe******t gas production, a combination of these factors led to a decline in natural gas production in the country is forced to adopt import mainly to fill the need of local as well as much exposure stations natural gas to near standstill because of the volatile security situation and proliferation of administrative corruption in many institutions distribution and sale of oil derivatives.

-- August 20, 2007 2:52 PM ∞

---

cornish boy wrote:

Oil giants rush to lay claim to Iraq
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,,2151542,00.html

-- August 20, 2007 2:55 PM ∞

---

cornish boy wrote:

Iraq lowers light crude oil price for USA and increases it for Asia and Europe
Monday, August 20, 2007 09:33 GMT http://www.alsumaria.tv/en/Economics-News-Iraq/3-6643-Iraq-lowers-light-crude-oil-price-for-USA-and-increases-it-for-Asia-and-Europe.html

-- August 20, 2007 3:01 PM ∞

---

Sara wrote:

Glad for the new page, too. :)
Here is an interesting commentary/perspective from Qatar's Leading English Daily:

Commentary: Both Sides Using Ceremonial Visits to Iraq to Gain Credibility
Finally getting somewhere in Iraq
By JONATHAN FINER Aug 20, 2007

LATE LAST MONTH the Brookings Institution’s Kenneth Pollack and Michael O’Hanlon, just back from a quick trip to Baghdad, proclaimed in the New York Times that “we are finally getting somewhere in Iraq.” In June, Senator Joseph Lieberman, fresh from his latest whirlwind tour of the war zone, described in the Wall Street Journal a “dramatic reversal” in the security situation in restive Anbar province.

Opponents of the war are also guilty of using visits to gain credibility. On a trip soon after the 2004 election, Senator John Kerry decried the “horrendous judgments” and “unbelievable blunders” made by President Bush. At a news conference I attended in Baghdad last summer, Senator Russ Feingold, a longtime proponent of withdrawal, said that continued US troop presence “may well be destabilising.” Little surprise that his travel companion, McCain, who attended the same briefings at the same bases, drew opposite conclusions.

A dizzying number of dignitaries have passed through Baghdad for high-level briefings. The Hill newspaper reported this month that 76 US senators have traveled to Iraq during the war, 38 in the past 12 months. Most never left the Green Zone or other well-protected enclaves. Few, if any, changed the views they held before arriving.

Reporters based in Baghdad rarely pay much attention to these visits, often skipping the news conferences that conclude most visiting delegations’ itineraries. Since leaving Iraq last year, I’ve been surprised by the impact these choreographed tours have had on domestic discourse about the war. First come opinion pieces full of bold pronouncements of “what I saw” at the front. Next, the recent returnees appear on late-night cable programmes or the Sunday talk shows. Those with opposing views respond, and soon the echo chamber is drowning out whatever’s really happening.

Those who visit Iraq undertake significant risks, which are inherent in traveling to Baghdad, no matter who’s providing their security. Policymakers should be commended for refusing to blindly trust accounts from diplomats, soldiers or journalists. But it’s worth remembering what these visits are and what they are not. Prescient insights rarely emerge from a few days in-country behind the blast walls.

It goes without saying that everyone can, and in this country should, have an opinion about the war, no matter how much time the person has spent in Iraq, if any. But having left a year ago, I’ve stopped pretending to those who ask that I have a keen sense of what it’s like on the ground today. Similarly, those who pass quickly through the war zone should stop ascribing their epiphanies to what are largely ceremonial visits.

(The writer was a Post correspondent in Baghdad from May 2005 to July 2006. He is currently covering the Balkans for The Post.)

http://www.thepeninsulaqatar.com/commentary/commentarypage.asp
http://sweetness-light-forum.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=906

Maybe the public should listen to the military commanders and what those who LIVE and WORK on the ground have to say instead of trusting the politicians who have an axe to grind either way? Just a thought..

Which reminds me.. hey, panhandler.. what are you up to? Anything new from over there? Hope you are well..

Sara.

-- August 20, 2007 3:39 PM ∞

---

Rob N. wrote:

Roger/Steve:

I have been following your discussion regarding the Iraqi Stock Market. By the way, "nice dog and pony show." The hoop-la of the ISX opening to foreign investors has come and gone. The reality is, until Iraq has measurable economic indicators and the companies not listed on the exchange list themselves the ISX is not reflective of full market activity in Iraq.

I read on another forum about Warka freezing the opening of new accounts. Steven, do you know why Warka would need to take such action? Are they so overwhelmed? Warka appears unable to handle the current influx of mainly U.S. and British investors. How will they respond once broad foreign investment begin?

I am skeptical of both Warka and the ISX. We still do not know what government oversight is in place to regulate these entities. I will stick with my cash in hand until I am convinced otherwise.

Thanks,

Rob N.

-- August 20, 2007 4:11 PM ∞

---

Laura Parker wrote:

Sara,

I saw your entry to my entry on the last thread. It is rotten luck as you have it, that I spent most of my afternoon to answer your entry to have mine in the end loss due to computer doing off line and then aol had a new tool bar download and an error message came up. I then discovered the new thread.

I was wondering if you could somehow copy my beginning entry and then your reply and possibly Roger's thoughts on the matter. I am still going to write a new reply to your last entry. However, my response is going to long on the Russians.

Laura Parker

-- August 20, 2007 6:13 PM ∞

---

David wrote:

Cornish -

Interesting article you posted about "Oil Giants Rush to Lay Claim to Iraq." The following quote cleared up a lot of things for me:

QUOTE
Separately, Russia has lobbied successfully to set up an energy cartel which it hopes will rival Opec. At the Shanghai Co-operation Organisation Summit in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan, leaders of Central Asian countries, China and Russia last week agreed to create a 'unified energy market' in the region that is home to some of the biggest producers of oil and gas.

Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made clear at the conference that Tehran was prepared to join the club, which would see the world's first, second and fourth largest gas producers form a powerful bloc, potentially ranged against Western interests.

Christopher Langton, an analyst at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said: 'Russia is seeking to have an organisation tilt the competition in its favour.'

The move coincides with the apparent decline of US influence in the region, where both the Trans-Caspian pipeline project and the diversion of Turkmen gas via Russia to Europe have stalled.

Ariel Cohen, a regional expert at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, said: 'The resource control in Russia's hands will benefit President Putin tremendously'.
END QUOTE

Lately I've been asking myself what Russia's motivation was in seeking political alliance with Iran. I mean, here's a country (Russia) with newfound wealth, able for the first time in 15 years to run continuous air reconnaisance missions, and all of that is because of the work of the West (esp. the US) in bringing about the demise of communism and the fall of the Soviet Union, as well as the advent of capitalism and democracy. After reading a few recent posts about Russia and its being in bed with Iran, my thoughts were: You ungrateful bastards. But that's the nature of people, isn't it? We have short memories, and old demons die hard. So...if you're going to do something good for someone just to hear the thank-you's, it's the wrong reason for generosity. One must care out of conviction, not for political or social gain.

But I digress. My point is this: While I don't believe that Bush's primary motivation for going into Iraq had to do with oil (although I AM sure it was on his radar screen), oil IS DEFINITELY Russia's primary motivation for allying itself with Iran. That and, secondarily, it's a thumb on the old cold-war nose. I'm embarrassed to admit I didn't see that earlier.

David

-- August 20, 2007 6:53 PM ∞

---

Laura Parker wrote:

David,

I am the one that started the discussion on Russia's forming alliances with Iran. There is more to be said on this topic. I am asking Sara to see if she can get the articles written on this from the last blog before this one has a really go start. Stay tuned, it gets worse!

Laura Parker

-- August 20, 2007 9:00 PM ∞

---

Laura Parker wrote:

David,

I meant good start.

Laura Parker

-- August 20, 2007 9:02 PM ∞

---

John Smith wrote:

Thomas Friedman, writer for the New York Times: "High energy prices, followed by a sharp decline in energy prices, really helped to bring down the Soviet Union. The government there spent money like it was going out of style while energy revenue was high, but then when price of oil fell, as did revenue, they couldn't sustain their expenses and that helped end the Soviet Union."

The price of oil is very high right now. The Russian economy is still heavily dependent on oil revenues. If there is a very large amount of oil in Iraq, enough to bring down the price of oil significantly, Russia could take an economic beating. The same with Iran, which is such a basketcase, they have to import oil products, despite having one of the largest reserves in the world. America's economy, however, would strengthen, with lower energy costs, as America imports most of it's oil. Not so for Iran. If the price of oil drops too much, it would be a disaster for the regime in Tehran, which could topple. They are very dependent on oil, for revenue... Talk about economic warfare. No wonder Russia and Iran doesn't support American efforts in Iraq. Go Bush!

-- August 20, 2007 9:49 PM ∞

---

Laura Parker wrote:

Sara and All,

I am going to try and start to communicate information in several parts because the information is long and I believe it important to what we are about. Sara, I still would like to see if you can get the information on those entries and place on this new blog. Ok?

The information is taken from EpiCenter by Joel C. Rosenberg and its the entire chapter 10: Future Headline: Global Tensions Soar As Russia Targets Israel

I think as I type this in sections, you will all get the point rather quickly. Lets begin. Some of you might want to buy the book. I got mine from a friend and read her copy. However, I am seriously going to buy my own copy.

In the spring 2006, I came across a headline on an Internet news site that read "Russia Would Never Harm Israel: Olmert." Curious, I clicked onto the link and found a story from Agence France-Presse, which began, "Israeli leader Ehud Olmert said he had been assured by President Vladimir Putin that Russia would 'never do anything to harm Israel' despite his invitation to Hamas for talks in Moscow.

"President Putin told me that he had previously given a commitment to Ariel Sharon that Russia would never do anything anything to harm the state of Israel and that that commitment applies to me as it did to Ariel Sharon,'" Olmert explained. The Israeli prime minister's official Web site later noted that "Russian President Putin emphasized several times (in his call with Olmert) that Russia would not take any step directed against Israeli interests and would not harm Israel's security."

If only we could take such assurances to the bank. Unfortunately, we cannot.

While it may be tempting to believe that the Russian Bear is dead and buried and poses no threat to Israel, the U.S., or anyone else, Ezekiel makes it clear that the Bear is only hibernating and will soon be back with a vengeance.

Ezekiel 38:8 says that in the latter years Russia "will come into the land that is restored from the sword, whose inhabitants have been gathered from many nations to the mountains of Israel" (NASB). Ezekiel 38:12 says Russia will target Israel, the epicenter (Middle East), the people who live "at the center of the world" (NASB). Ezekiel 38:14 says Russia will target "My people Israel" (NASB). Ezekiel 38:18 says Russia "Comes against the land of Israel" (NASB). Ezekiel 39:2 says Russia will come "against the mountains of Israel" (NASB). Ezekiel 38:10 makes crystal clear that the Russian dictator in charge of this operation will be executing "an evil plan" (NASB).

Despite such specificity, however, there will be those who misunderstand the nature and threat of this "evil plan" and thus will be at risk of being blindsided by it.

"THE FINAL THRUST SOUTH"

While Putin has not yet tipped his hand about any specific designs on Israel, there are men around Putin who have. One such leader is the current deputy speaker of the State Duma, one of the highest-ranking political leaders in the Russian government and a strategic ally of Putin.

Consider excerpts from a book written by this Russian leader in 1993, in which he details his plans for expanding the Russian empire to the south--toward and ultimately through Israel:

*** The operation should be carried out using the code-name "Final Thrust to the South." Our army will carry out this task. It will be a means for the nation as a whole to survive and a way to restore the Russian army....Russia reaching the shores of the Indian Ocean and the Mediterranean Sea is a task that will be the salvation of the Russian nation....Russia will grow rich.

*** The Arabs and Europeans...have a vested interest in seeing to it Russia establishes her new borders....Only in this way can they escape the Israeli trap.

*** Can't Russia, mustn't Russia, make just one move, one little move southward?...The Germans want this....The world will understand that if Russia needs it that means it's good.

*** The Russian army needs this. It will let our boys flex their muscles instead of sitting around the barracks, worn out by hazing, in the depths of Russia, not knowing who and where the enemy is and what moral and physical preparations they should make.

*** Only America would not be pleased, but she won't interfere. The alternative to this development of this situation is too grave for her if she interferes.

*** This is....Russia's fate, and without it Russia is doomed to stop growing and die....Russia has been given a great historical mission. Therefore it must act decisively.

*** Let Russia make its final "thrust" to the south. I can see the Russian soldiers gathering for the final expedition southward. I can see Russian commanders in Russian division and army headquarters, mapping out the route for the military formations and the endpoints of those routes. I see aircraft gathered in air bases around the southern regions of Russia. I see submarines surfacing...and armored infantry vehicles are on the move and great masses of tanks are rolling through. Russia will finally make her last military expedition.

The author of this book, titled The Final Thrust South, is Vladimir Volfovich Zhirinovsky, the bombastic, often ridiculed, but influential ultranationalist founder of the woefully misnamed Liberal Democratic Party of Russia (LDPR). In 1994, when few intelligence analysts in Moscow or Washington took him seriously, Zhirinovsky triggered a political earthquake when his LDPR won a quarter of the seats in the Russian parliament, just a year after laying out this Fascist and imperialist vision of Russia's future.

A 1994 Time magazine cover story titled "Rising Czar?" noted:

Zhirinovsky is no ordinary politician. (He) has slugged fellow lawmakers in the halls of parliament, hobnobbed with ex-Nazi storm troopers in Austria and posed, au naturel, for photographers while cavorting in a steam bath in Serbia. He has been kicked out of or denied access to nearly half a dozen European countries. He has threatened to restore Russia's imperial borders, annex Alaska, invade Turkey, repartition Poland, give Germany "another Chrenobyl," turn Kazakhstan into a "scorched desert", and employ large fans to blow radioactive waste across the Baltics. To Western eyes, the incendiary rhetoric and exuberant loutishness of this barnstorming Bonaparte have marked him as something of a buffoon. But to many Russicans, Zhirinovsky offers a kind of touchstone for their deepest yearnings and frustrations.

Indeed he does, and that is his danger. As Heritage Foundation Russia expert Ariel Cohen wrote in 1994, "It is tempting to dismiss Zhirinovsky's outrageous book as political polemic. But a failed Austrian painter and former army corporal was similarly ignored when he published his own tract: Mein Kampf. The tendency to dismiss Zhirinovsky as a buffoon and to assume that his supporters did not know what they were voting for may be a naive, even dangerous, response to his election and his position as de facto opposition leader gives him influence that cannot be ignored."

THE MAN BEHIND THE MAN

When I (means Joel Rosenberg, the author) last visited Moscow, I sought a meeting with Zhirinovsky. In Ezekiel Option (another book he wrote), after all, I was writing about a Fascist, anti-Semitic ultranationalist who rises to power in Moscow, becomes a czar, and leads the Russian army south to the Mediterranean. Why not meet such a person in real life?

Zhirinovsky's personal support among Russians had slipped since he had landed on the cover of Time. In December 2003 elections, the LDPR received only 11.6 percent of the vote and 38 seats in the DUMA. But he was still a player. Zhirinovsky and his colleagues represented the third-biggest political force in the country, behind Putin's United Russia Party (222 seats) and the Communist Party (53 seats). What's more, several Russia experts I trust suggested that the LDPR's drop in the polls had nothing to do with Russians becoming less nationalist but with Putin becoming more so. Why vote for "Mad Vlad," they argued, when Putin was the real deal---a tough-as-nails leader, a czar in the making, without any of Zhirinovsky's rhetorical baggage? The more authoritarian Putin has become, they explained, the more votes he has siphoned off of the nationalist and ultranationalist parties into his own camp.

"Actually, the guy you want to see," one of my Russian friends told me, "is not Zhirinovsky himself. I mean, he's fun to talk to. You've get some great quotes. But the guy you really want to talk to is the man behind the man, Zhirinovsky's brain."

"Who's that?" I asked. "Alexei Mitrofanov," he said. "He's the number two guy in the LDPR. For years he was the chairman of the Geopolitical Committee of the Duma, roughly the equivalent of the (U.S.) House Foreign Relations Committee. He's Zhirinovsky's chief strategist. But far more importantly, he's a guy who is quietly, carefully helping shape Putin's direction, and thus Russia's."

My father and I met Mitrofanov for coffee at the Hotel National, across the street from Red Square and the Kremlin, on Wednesday, September 1, 2004. We had never met a Fascist before, and certainly not one with real political power. We didn't even know what Mitrofanov looked like and weren't quite sure what to expect. But soon a large, plump man not much older than myself (he was born in 1962, I in 1967 (Rosenberg dob)arrived with several bodyguards who took up positions by the doors of the restaurant.

In manner, he was the complete opposite of Zhirinovsky--well educated, sof-spoken, almost sky--and clearly intent on putting a "kinder, gentler" face on his boss's vicious brand of politics. But it soon became readily apparent that this was indeed "Zhirinovksy's brain." They think exactly alike.

"We are pragmatic people," Mitrofanov began, speaking of himself and his party. "But Russia is in danger of collapsing with ten years....Gorbachev made foolish decisions. He lost the whole empire for nothing. But it just proves that if the leader will be weak, Russia will be ruined....Russians want a strong dictator."

"What about Putin?" I asked. "Is he a czar?"

"Putin is a nationalist, a pragmatic nationalist," Mitrofanov replied. "I had many private conversations with hime before he became president and I know that he is close to out party in his heart...But he is not a strong leader. He has too many limitations."

Well, that was a twist, I thought, someone who thinks Putin isn't czarlike enough. "What about your boss? Is he the next czar?"

"Zhirinovsky wants to be like Stalin," he said, "like Lenin. He wants to have power and make Russia number one in the world again."

"Does he have a chance at succeeding Putin?"

"I think yes," Mitrofanov explained. "Not in the next elections, in 2008. But in 2012, I think Zhirinovsky will be the president of Russia. He will be sixty-six. He will have been in politics for twenty years. People will know his name, his brand, like Marlboro, like Coca-Cola.... Besides, Zhirinovsky will be very quiet (until then). He is changing."

"Changing how?" I asked.

"Changing his style and his ideas, gaining experience....He is the man Russia needs."

"What would he do as president, in foreign policy, for example?"

"He would build a coalition," Mitrofanov replied without hesitation. "Russia must control four countries in order to have quiet borders---Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, and Pakistan." Then, after a moment's pause, he added, "And Turkey."

"Why these?"

"Zhirinovsky wants to rebuild the Byzantine Empire," he said
matter-of-factly.

I just stared at him, trying to process what he was saying and why he was being so open about his party's ambitions. The Byzantine Empire? I thought. That would include a lot more land than just those five countries. It would include Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Eqypt...and Israel.

"We need it," Mitrofanov explained, "or we will have instability."

"Doesn't such a position run the risk of having the LDPR be accused of being anti-Semitic and anti-Israel?"

"Russia is very quiet towards the Jews today," he said. "There's no anti-Semitism here. Not like in Europe....I know people in the Russian military---very nationalistic people---who have ideas that Jewish people have ruined Russia, and they have an idea to attack Israel. Colonel (Pavel) Chernove of the FSB, for example. He believes we should say to the Muslim World, 'We have the power, the land, and the nuclear weapons. You have one billion people, living bombs. Let's work together.' He said Russia must be Muslim, not Orthodox Christian.... He wanted to push Jews out of all leadership positions in Russia."

"What's Chernov doing now?" I asked.

"He used to be in the LDPR," Mitrofanov freely admitted. "He played an important part in the party for a while. He was number two, in fact, until Zhirinovsky fired him. He drank too much. Fired off a machine gun. But he had lots of supporters."

I looked at my father, and he looked back at me. He didn't say anything then; nor did I. But we were thinking the same thing. We were sitting with a man who believed that an ex-FSB officer's offense was getting drunk and blowing off some steam, not his desire to form a nuclear alliance with Iran and the rest of the Muslim world to blow up Israel. And as evil as that was, this was no crank we'd met at the Moscow circus. Mitrofanov is a respected member of the Russian parliament. He was a senior advisor to the deputy speaker of the that parliament. And he had no hesitation to tell two Americans that he and his party want Russia to build an empire and launch the "final thrust south."

We thanked him for his time, paid our bill, and left as quickly as we could.
-----

There is a map of the Byzantine Empire in AD 550 and it covers Italy, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, Macedonia, Greece, Albania, Turkey, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Israel, Cypress, Tunisa, Egypt, parts of lower Spain. I wish we could scan in a map of the Byzantine Empire in AD 550.

This section is where I am going to stop for the night. However, you are going to be interested in the rest of this chapter, I promise. I will continue this tommorrow.

Hope this makes for interesting discussion!

-- August 20, 2007 11:43 PM ∞

---

Chris wrote:

Announcement No.(991)

D.G. of Foreign Exchange Control

The 991 daily currency auction was held in the Central Bank of Iraq day Tuesday 2007/8/21 so the results were as follows :

Details Notes
Number of banks 11 -----
Auction price selling dinar / US $ 1239 -----
Auction price buying dinar / US $ 1237 -----
Amount sold at auction price (US $) 50.895.000 -----
Amount purchased at Auction price (US $) 15.000.000
Total offers for buying (US $) 50.895.000 -----
Total offers for selling (US $) 15.000.000 -----

-- August 21, 2007 6:53 AM ∞

---

Sara wrote:

I was thinking about the latest big attacks in Iraq. The terrorists point to it as their victory, but it really is not the fault of the American and Coalition forces. It is the fault of the Iraqi Parliamentarians.

Isa 17:14 And behold at eveningtide trouble; and before the morning he is not. This is the portion of them that spoil us, and the lot of them that rob us.

Those who spoil and rob us of our right are reaping a longer, more troubled and bloody conflict ("before the morning he is not" = death). Because they will not do the oil laws and begin the process of reconstruction of their nation, they doom their own people to harm and death. Do you think the terrorists used local Iraqi people to do these latest attacks? Why is it they could find such people, ripe for delinquency? Because they are desperate people, without jobs or hope. And why is that? Because the Iraqi Parliament would rather squabble about being Sunni or Shiite than care about the Iraqi people as a nation.

When I see the devastating attacks I think it more evidence of the portion of those who spoil and rob us of our right. They take from US, and they reap "before the morning, they are not".. the removal of their very lives. Such is the deserved punishment of those who will not cooperate with what is right for the nation.. trouble and death. If they want God on their side and His protection, they cannot do what is evil.. robbing and spoiling us of our due rights due to the perogative of winning in war... this results in consequences to them and their people and loved ones. I have no doubt that this is how God will judge it, and how He will blame it, in the end analysis. No matter how men try to blame it on America, it is not us but the supposed "representatives" of the Iraqi people - who are taking a leisure break right now - it is the Iraqi Parliamentarians who are condemning their own people to attack and death by their own inaction on the political front.

They have much to answer for, for the blood is on their hands before the courts of God.

Sara.
PS Laura, I think those who read the board have read our arguments.. do continue on if you have more thoughts on it. Summary - Roger said the Russians are not a force which is capable of superpower status which would rival the US or pose a true danger, though they have some weapons from The Cold War and are attempting to upgrade them. You pointed out the endtime scenerio which has Iran and Russia allied in a final battle, and I said it isn't for this time that those words were written. The time is not appointed to be the end of all things yet. This time is to fulfill other Scriptures which have to do with the two missing players in your narrative, Iraq and Egypt, and the calling placed on them. I gave references to back these assertions, including ones explaining the indigenous people of Iraq and their claims upon their nation, Iraq.

Thank you, John Smith, for contributing your post on why (this time around) Iran and Russia are opposing the US.. due to economic reasons and the price of oil. Very interesting.. thank you. :)

-- August 21, 2007 8:48 AM ∞

---

Laura Parker wrote:

All,

Rosenberg Cont'd... EpiCenter

1982: THE THREAT FROM THE NORTH

Since the times of Czar Peter the Great, Russian leaders have had designs on central Asia and the Near East, and for nearly half of the twentieth century, Moscow armed Israel's enemies and encouraged them to attack and destroy the Jewish state. But now a fuller and more disturbing picture is emerging. Previously classified White House, CIA, and State Department documents, as well as interviews with top U.S. and Israeli leaders and historians, reveal that Moscow has on more than one occasion planned direct Russian invasions of Israel.

In the summer of 1982, for example, then-Israel prime minister Menachem Begin went public with a story that prior to that time had been known only to the upper echelons of Israeli and U.S. intelligence. The Israeli Defense Forces, he explained, had uncovered a secret buy massive cache of Soviet weaponry in deep underground cellars and tunnels in Lebanon that had caught him and his top advisors completely off guard. The weapons appeared to have been pre-positioned by Moscow for the launching of a full-scale invasion of Israel and the oil-rich nations of the Middle East.

Begin said Israel had found "ten times more Russian weapons than were previously reported." The haul, he told reporters, included 4000 tons of ammunition, 144 armored vehicles and tanks, 12500 pieces of small arms, 515 heavy weapons, 359 sophisticated communications devices, and 795 "optical instruments" (including night-vision goggles and field glasses). It was enough, Begin believed, to equip at least five Russian combat brigades and required, according to one-report, "a fleet of 10 ton trucks, working day and night for six weeks, to haul them back to Israel."

"I can now tell you," the Israeli prime minister continued, "that only yesterday...we found other arms depots containing fully ten times as many weapons as we had found before, enough to equip not five brigades, but five or six divisions. We shall need literally hundreds of trucks to evacuate these weapons from Lebanon, where we shall undoubtedly fine more arms."

Begin said that Israeli intelligence had bably underestimated the Russian threat from the north. Israel certainly knew the Soviets were arming Yasser Arafat and the Palestine Liberation Organization for their terrorist attacks against Israel. That was why Israel had invaded Lebanon in the first place. But Begin conceded that neither he nor his colleagues had any idea of the extent to which Moscow was preparing for a massive future ground assault against the Jewish state.

"Something happened which nobody knew," Begin admitted. "In fact, the evidence at hand points to a conspiracy, that pre-positioning by the Soviet Union of such massive quantities of arms---and I mean modern, highly sophisticated weapons--could only be in preparation for some indeterminate future date to overrun Israel, then Jordan, and then Saudia Arabia and other Persian Gulf States. Otherwise, there is no explanation for the quantities of weapons we have found. The (Palestinians) couldn't have used them, having neither the necessary manpower nor the skills."

The Washington Post reported the story of the Soviet arms cache on July 7, 1982. But the implications of such an important discovery got lost amid a series of other earthshaking events in the Middle East. Just one month earlier, an Israeli air strike had destroyed the Osirak nuclear reactor and thus Iraq's entire nuclear-weapons development program. And just two months after the discovery of the Soviet arms, members of the Maronite Phalange militia massacred hundreds of Palestinian men, women, and children in Lebanese refugee camps known as Sabra and Shatila.

The Osirak bombing and the Sabra and Shatila massacres, alson with international outcry over whether Israeli defense minister Ariel Sharon was responsible for letting the massacres happen, dominated world headlines for months. (I, Laura Parker don't remember this event. I wonder if the Russian were behind this?). Begin found himself and his entire government on defense in the global public-relations wars. And the Soviets' plans and preparations for invading Israel and the rest of the Middle East were lost to a world that either never heard the story, did not remember, or did not care.

When I (Rosenberg) interviewed Caspar Weinberger, who was the U.S. defense secretary in 1982, he both remembered and confirmed Menachem Begin's story for me. He also admitted that the discovery of the Soviet arms cache "was perhaps larger than most people (in Washington) would have expected." Weinberger conceded that he and others in the Pentagon were surprised by the "size, scope, and speed"---and secrecy---of the Soviet pre-positioning in the Middle East, given how carefully the U.S. was watching the Soviet military.

But Weinberger said he was not surprised that the Soviets had been preparing for an invasion of Israel, Saudia Arabia, and the Persian Gulf region. To the contrary, these were precisely the concerns that were driving the Reagan administration's anti-Soviet policy at the time.

"We (in the Reagan White House and the Pentagon) were all concerned about growing Soviet influence and growing Soviet attempts to increase their stature in the whole Mideast," Weinberger told me. "And the fact that here was confirmation of this by this discovery of a very large stash of weapons was continually disturbing, but not surprising...The fact that they (the Soviets) were building up their weapons and planning to use various Mideast spots as bases for military action was not a surprise--it was the size, scope, and speed with which it was being carried out that was further reason, we thought, why their motives had to be watched quite carefully."

I asked Weinberger specifically if he and President Reagan had shared Prime Minister's Begin's concern that the Soviets might try to overrun Israel, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and the other Persian Gulf states.

He confirmed that they had. "The Soviets were trying to increase their influence in the whole Mideast. They were (targeting) the oil fields...We were taking actions and preparing ourselves to prevent that domination from succeeding."

Did he believe the discovery of the Soviet arms justified the Israeli invasion of Lebanon and attempts to destroy the PLO? Weinberger said Israel's move was at first "disturbing" because it was a "unilateral action" and threatened to upset the fragile balance of power in the Middle East, and this was "not good."

That said, however, he suggested that on balance the Israelis were probably right to go in, especially given what they found and the Soviet invasion they may have stopped. It was a total surprise. It unleashed international condemnation of Israel, including pointed criticism from the Reagan administration itself. But the result was that Israel effectively staved off far more cataclysmic evils that were coming from the Russians.

Then Weinberger warned that the discovery of the secret Soviet arms cache was disturbing evidence "that military actions are being planned" or "made increasingly possible" in the Middle East that can elude the detection of even the world's best intelligence services.

-- August 21, 2007 9:38 AM ∞

---

Laura Parker wrote:

The item I am trying to submit is long and therefore, I am going to type it in sections.
I hope everyone will understand what I am getting at when all done.

Laura Parker

-- August 21, 2007 9:44 AM ∞

---

Laura Parker wrote:

Sara, Roger and All-

Sara, I wanted to thank you for your submission of Isaiah. I did know it was there and it saved me time to look it up. I would agree with you that the highway has not been built. It gives us hope that we know that Iraq will become a nation in its own right.

Given, what I have just typed, I am concerned about the same method of arms cache coming through Lebanon again to attach Israel and the Middle East. The question is how strong is Russian now and going to be.

The article submitted on natural gas coalition with the Russians, Chinese is troubling. Especially as Iran will join too, looking so innocently.

We need to be on guard and understand these geopolitical motivations and be able to counter these moves. For the life of me, I am not sure how we do this.

In the democratic debates for President of the U.S., one of the candidates let it drop that President Bush is trying to get Buster Breaking Bombs to pentrate lower cellars under the ground where nuclear weapons are stored. I suspect, President Bush is considering going after the Iranian Nuclear situation. The democrats have made it clear that they are going to block this initiative.

It's a dangerous world we live in.

Pray-

Laura Parker

-- August 21, 2007 10:05 AM ∞

---

Laura Parker wrote:

All, Rosenberg cont'd from EpiCenter:

1973: THE BRINK OF NUCLEAR WAR

On October 6, 1973, combined Arab forces from Egypt, Syria and numberous other Arab and Islamic countries attacked Israel on Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, the holiest day of the Jewish year.

Tensions had been building for months. Rumors of war were in the air. But both Israeli and U.S. intelligence officials and political leaders were caught almost completely off guard, not believing the war would really come. Israeli prime minister Golda Meir was so sure fighting would not break out that she had refused to order a preemptive strike or even to mobilize the Israeli reserves, not wanting to provoke hostilities if they could be avoided. That hesitation nearly led to the annihilation of the Jewish state.

Over the course of the first week of the war, the Arab coalition made stunning gains. In the north, 1000 Syrian tanks and 600 pieces of Syrian artillery stormed up the Golan Heights and advanced toward the vulnerable Israeli farmlands of the Galilee region. To the south, some 400 Egyptian tanks crossed the Suez Canal, wiped out Israel's forward defenses, and began working their way across the Sinai Desert. Meanwhile, Arab air forces shot down three dozen Israeli fighter planes in just the first few days.

It was clear to the general public at the time that the Soviet Union was providing the weaponry, ammunition, intelligence, and military training to help the Arab and Islamic coalition destroy Israel, a key ally of the United States. What was not known publicly was the extent to which the Soviets were orchestrating the war behind the scenes and preparing to enter it directly.

By the second week of the war, the momentum had begun to shift. The Israelis had retaken the Golan Heights and were bombing Damascus. They had also retaken most of the Sinai Peninsula, crossed the Suez Canal, and had ground forces within a hundred kilometers of Cairo. By the third week, Moscow was under tremendous pressure from the entire Arab world not to let the Israelis humiliate Syrian president Hafez al-Assad or Egyptian president Anwar Sadat, so Moscow began to move. The Soviets began a massive airlift of arms and ammunition to their allies. The U.S., in turn, began a massive, round the clock airlift of arms and supplies to Israel.

On October 24 at around 10pm eastern time, the Soviet ambassador to Washington, Anatoly Dobrynin, telephoned Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and dictated the text of a top secret message from Russian general secretary Leonid Brezhnev to President Richard Nixon. In the message, Brezhnev accussed Israel of refusing to abide by a ceasefire called by the UN Security Council and then issued a chilling threat: "I will say it straight: that if you find it impossible to act jointly with us in this matter, we should be faced with the necessity urgently to consider the question of taking appropriate steps unilaterally. We cannot allow arbitrariness on the part of Israel."

It was cloaked in the language of diplomats, but there it was: if the Nixon administration did not stop the Israelis from advancing and agree to send a joint Soviet-American ground force to the region to act as peacekeepers, the Soviets would send ground forces in "unilaterally."

Top U.S. officials in the White House and National Security Council were stunned as Brezhnev threatened to turn an already dangerous regional confrontation into an overt global showdown between East and West. What's more, they knew they would have no choice but to match any move by the Soviets to escalate the situation. Washington had to defend Israel or send a devastating message to her allies that the U.S. could not be counted on in a direct showdown with Russia.

And then the Soviets began to escalate. At least seven Soviet combat-ready airborne divisions in East Germany and elsewhere in Eastern Europe were put on alert and mobilized for immediate departure for the Middle East. Soviet tranport planes were positioned and prepped to insert these forces into the fight with Israel. Soviet warships moved into the Mediterranean.

The U.S., in turn, ordered its own military forces on alert. The Pentagon ordered U.S. nuclear forces to DEFCON 3, the highest state of peacetime readiness. The Joing Chiefs of Staff also ordered the 82nd Airborne Division to prepare to head to the Middle East. Additional U.S. naval forces--including another aircraft carrier---moved into the Mediterranean, all out of a real and rising conern that the Soviets were about to makea unprecedented military move against Israel.

Kissinger drafted for President Nixon (who was deeply embroiled in the Watergate scandal at the time) a reply that was sent to General Secretary Brezhnev on October 25. In the letter Nixon bluntly said to the Soviet leader that the U.S. had "no information which would indicate that the ceasefire is now being violated on any significant scale." He agreed to "take every effective step to guarantee the implementation of the ceasefire" and said the U.S. was working closely with Israel to bring about a peaceful resolution to the crisis.

But he also warned that "in these circumstances, we must view your suggestion of unilateral action as a matter of the gravest concern involving incalculable consequences...(W)e could in no event accept unilateral (Soviet) action. This would be in violation of our understandings, of the agreed Principles we signed in Moscow in 1972, and of Article 2 of the Agreement on Prevention of Nuclear War....Such action would produce incalculable consequences which would be in the interest of neither of our countries and which would end all we have striven so hard to achieve."

Nixon's firm letter, combined with the heightened American military posture, soon made it clear to Moscow that any move they made against Israel would be met with the full force of the United States. Within days, the Soviets backed off. Tensions began to defuse, and a full cease-fire was eventually achieved. Not since the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 had the U.S. and Soviet Union come so close to the brink of nuclear war, and this time the motivating factor was a Russian leader's threat to attack Israel directly.

Yet for all that, Kissinger would remark to his top aides that the Soviet military "did not maneuver as provocatively as they did in 1967."

----

And we have a Hugo Chavez in our back yard. Makes one wonder if we maybe facing another Cuban missile crisis!

-- August 21, 2007 11:02 AM ∞

---

Sara wrote:

Laura, could you SUMMARIZE your point(s), please?

Are you saying Putin is the antiChrist or is he the person depicted in the endtime prophecies concerning "the bear", according to your view?

What is the conclusion of your articles which you wish to discuss?
How does it affect the Middle East, and ultimately our investment (Iraq and the Dinar)?

Sara.

-- August 21, 2007 12:07 PM ∞

---

Laura Parker wrote:

Sara,

First, I am not saying that Putin is necessarily the anti-Christ. However, he is following the agenda of setting up alliances with various countries in the Middle East that the Bible outlines. His work is going to be very useful to the next leaders of Russian.

Second, it would appear that Russia is heading into a czar like dictatorship by moving away from democratic freedoms i.e., like elected officials, open press etc. The article is useful from Rosenberg, as it again gives us insight to declassified documents showing Russian intent to attack the Middle East for oil and the possible trade route of the Israelis. The Russians are again showing this military behavior.

Third, I would agree with Roger that the Russian do not have the up to date military hardware. However, I would not dismiss them--as this could be very dangerous. They have been using the Islamist, Moslems all along as bodies to fight a proxy war. Just as the Iranians are doing in Iraq. Militarily, I believe that the Soviets are providing the arms, military planning and advisors to the Arabs, Islamists/Moslems.

Fourth, we even see the possible intent of Russians willing to change religions for military reasons to become muslims. A statement to outright reject Christianity.

Sara, it maybe possible that the anti-Christ comes from Russia but I am unsure about this one. However, we do know that this person is going to be influencial in the European Union. I read somewhere, that one of the Russian politicians wanted to join this union for fear of having to stand up militariliy to China. I thought that interesting!

Fifth, the coalitions we have been noticing are designed to fight an economic war against freedom loving nations (not simply the U.S.).

Sixth, the coalitions are also designed to take over nations militarily if left unchecked.

---

Now you might ask, how does this affect the dinar?. Rosenberg also did another interview with Casper Weinberger and he asked him, if he thought Iran had a nuclear bomb as of yet? Weinberger (former Reagan defense secretary) believed that Iran already has the bomb. He believed this is why the Iranian President is being so provocative. I think, Bush thinks so too.

This reality (of Iran having nuclear weapons) will have a definate impact on the dinar and as you observed earlier, this situation is going to have to be dealt with soon. I am not suggesting that this is the end times war.

What I am suggesting is what Jesus said. He stated that men can judge the weather but do know know how to judge the seasons/times. I am simply making an observation, that we seem to be at a time in life---the beginning of biblical prophecy heading into the end times.

Let's not get blindsided by countries with evil plans and motivations for the spoils of war. Stay on the alert and watch!

Finally, war could break out in the Middle East and the way you invest your dinars such as a middle east banks could be very risky indeed, if this occurs.

Laura Parker

-- August 21, 2007 1:29 PM ∞

---

cornish boy wrote:

Warka's Dinar Transfer Policy

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

Dear XXXXX,

Due to the large number of FedEx packages that are being sent from the USA tighter restrictions and controls will be placed by the Iraqi customs on the FedEx packages that are coming from the USA and to avoid the possibility of the packages being confiscated we recommend that clients deal with our US associate and VVIP client Mr. William Burbank who can assist our esteemed clients with their dinars through his company BB&M International.

By using BB&M International to transfer your Iraqi paper dinar into Iraq you do not break laws in either the US or in Iraq. BB&M is a licensed registered currency trading company in the US licensed with the US treasury and licensed and registered in Iraq as a finance business as well. They sell your dinar into dollars at spot in the Dubai currency market and wire the dollars directly into your account at Warka Bank for Investment and Finance. They use licensed, bonded and insured couriers from Titan Security company a company licensed by US Department of Justice to courier the notes to Dubai. This complies with all laws in both countries and allows you to safely hold your existing position in the Iraqi dinar in an Iraqi institution.

For further information please contact Mr. Burbank at the following email address: bbm@onebox.com

If clients still choose and prefer to send funds by FedEx they will be doing so at their own personal risk.

Best Regards,

Deputy Managing Director
International Affairs
__________________
.

-- August 21, 2007 1:40 PM ∞

---

cornish boy wrote:

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

Inflation Measure Decrease of Past July

Inflation measure decreased for last July as were recorded in last June as the general standard number reflected for the consumer prices in 3,2%.

A source at planning ministry said that, the static's central body and information technology carried out the report of the inflation for July which accounted on the basic of collecting the statements fields about the price of the goods and the formed services for the consumers basket of the retail in a collecting markets in Baghdad and the provinces which showed inflation measure decrease last month resulted in the standard number for the foodstuffs, fabrics, clothes, shoes, furniture, fuels, lighting, and transporting, pointing that the agreement on these collections formed 83,0 % from the family consumer spending.

Inflation Measure Decrease of Past July | Iraq Updates
__________________

-- August 21, 2007 2:03 PM ∞

---

cornish boy wrote:

IMF advises Iraq to shore up reconstruction, oil investment

For the first time in 25 years, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) has advised Iraq to increase the pace of reconstruction and investment, mainly in the oil sector.

"Directors commended the Iraqi authorities for keeping their economic programme on track by strengthening economic policies and making progress in structural reforms, de****e an unsettled political situation and a very difficult security environment," said the IMF in a statement Tuesday summarizing its Executive Board assessment on Iraq's economic performance.

"The expansion of oil production is lagging, and that inflation, while on a downward path, remains high, reflecting in large part continued shortages, notably of fuel products," added the statement.

After a decline in oil production in 2005, economic growth was estimated at nearly 6 per cent in 2006, while maintaining an average annual crude oil production of two million barrels per day since 2004.

The IMF urged the Iraqi authorities to "strengthen the protection of oil installations" and welcomed Baghdad's decision to raise the fuel price to the regional level to avoid direct subsidies on fuel products.

Inflation in Iraq is at 46 per cent in June 2007, the Central Bank of Iraq (CBI) allowed the exchange rate of the Iraqi dinar to appreciate by 15 per cent and the CBI's gross domestic reserves increased to USD 18.7 billion by end of last year.

The Executive Board praised the Iraqi government's fiscal policy in 2007, calling on the CBI to "stand ready to accelerate the pace of appreciation and tighten monetary conditions further if inflation deviates from its downward path and dollarization is not reduced as expected".

"Key to fighting inflation would be to continue restraining public spending pressures and stepping up efforts to reduce shortages, especially by actively supporting private sector fuel imports," added the statement.

This consultation, taking over two years to culminate, advised the Iraqi government to "streamline the tax system with a view to expanding the tax base and improving incentives for economic activity", improve public transparency and accountability, and restructure the banking system.

The IMF linked economic improvement to security condition in Iraq and encouraged Iraq's effort to join the World Trade Organisation (WHO).

IMF advises Iraq to shore up reconstruction, oil investment | Iraq Updates
__________________

-- August 21, 2007 2:16 PM ∞

---

cornish boy wrote:

Leaflets Said to Warn of Iran Move into North Iraq
http://pukmedia.com/english/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=722&Itemid=1

-- August 21, 2007 2:20 PM ∞

---

Laura Parker wrote:

All,

I have another question, Why would it be in other countries and Arab interest to help Russia establish it's new borders, if Russia thrusted south to the Mediterrean and to the Indian Ocean?.

This was a point that Zhirinovsky made from his book.

Laura Parker

-- August 21, 2007 2:20 PM ∞

---

Sara wrote:

Laura;

Interesting perspective, thank you. :)

Time magazine, in partnership with CNN, put out an article three days ago which says, quote:

Prelude to an Attack on Iran
By Robert Baer
Saturday, Aug. 18, 2007

Reports that the Bush Administration will put Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps on the terrorism list can be read in one of two ways: it's either more bluster or, ominously, a wind-up for a strike on Iran. Officials I talk to in Washington vote for a hit on the IRGC, maybe within the next six months. And they think that as long as we have bombers and missiles in the air, we will hit Iran's nuclear facilities. An awe and shock campaign, lite, if you will. But frankly they're guessing; after Iraq the White House trusts no one, especially the bureaucracy.

As with Saddam and his imagined WMD, the Administration's case against the IRGC is circumstantial. The U.S. military suspects but cannot prove that the IRGC is the main supplier of sophisticated improvised explosive devices to insurgents killing our forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. The most sophisticated version, explosive formed projectiles or shape charges, are capable of penetrating the armor of an Abrams tank, disabling the tank and killing the crew.

A former CIA explosives expert who still works in Iraq told me: "The Iranians are making them. End of story." His argument is only a state is capable of manufacturing the EFP's, which involves a complicated annealing process. Incidentally, he also is convinced the IRGC is helping Iraqi Shi'a militias sight in their mortars on the Green Zone. "The way they're dropping them in, in neat grids, tells me all I need to know that the Shi'a are getting help. And there's no doubt it's Iranian, the IRGC's," he said.

A second part of the Administration's case against the IRGC is that the IRGC has had a long, established history of killing Americans, starting with the attack on the Marines in Beirut in 1983. And that's not to mention it was the IRGC that backed Hizballah in its thirty-four day war against Israel last year. The feeling in the Administration is that we should have taken care of the IRGC a long, long time ago.

Strengthening the Administration's case for a strike on Iran, there's a belief among neo-cons that the IRGC is the one obstacle to a democratic and friendly Iran. They believe that if we were to get rid of the IRGC, the clerics would fall, and our thirty-years war with Iran over. And what do we do if just the opposite happens — a strike on Iran unifies Iranians behind the regime? An Administration official told me it's not even a consideration. "IRGC IED's are a casus belli for this Administration. There will be an attack on Iran."

— Robert Baer, a former CIA field officer assigned to the Middle East, is TIME.com's intelligence columnist and the author of See No Evil and, most recently, the novel Blow the House Down

http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1654188,00.html

Quite obviously, this would indeed change things for our Dinar investment. As I intimated previously, it would be better for the situation if the Iraqi economy were on the upswing and stabilizing, rather than in the shambles it now finds itself. Heaping one crisis upon another is not a wise thing to do, in my view. The upward valuation of the Dinar (not holding it down artificially) would be a great help in bringing about help in that direction. I believe that the wisest way to proceed would be for the Dinar to have its upward valuation and begin the process toward economic repair before the attack becomes necessary against Iran.

As for "not considering" what would happen IF the Iranians unifed behind the regime.. how come the press thinks that the US runs scenerios for every situation that could happen militarily.. except for one which would be brought directly to bear upon an intentionally planned move? Do they really think the military are that lazy or stupid? Or do they think that they are the only ones who could possibly discern that this COULD be one possibility.. however remote? I am always amazed at the professed intellectual superiority those who write for the MSM think they have over military commanders whose training and jobs do encompass running such scenerios. I also marvel that such people think they have greater acumen than the people now calling the shots in the Whitehouse. Their pride is only matched by their expectation of public gullibilty and congratulation to them for pointing out such "defects".. but even public gullibility has its limits if they think they can hoodwink what they consider to be the degree infested but braindead masses into believing such utter crud.

Sara.

-- August 21, 2007 4:36 PM ∞

---

cornish boy wrote:

Iraq

Information on sending a shipment to Iraq


Prohibited Commodities

Standard DHL prohibitions plus: All items offensive to the Muslim and Iraq culture or sensitive to the Middle East area security situation are prohibited. These include pork products, religious publications / figures, imitation firearms, paraphernalia, military uniform, or Quranic verses. All prohibited items received will be subject to Customs fines.

Alcoholic beverages
Animal skins
Antiques
Furs
Gambling devices
Ivory
Jewellery, costume
Playing cards
Postal envelopes
Precious metals & stones
Soil samples

View Standard DHL prohibitions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Certain commodities need to be accompanied by an invoice and, in some cases, additional customs documentation. Other commodities are considered as 'Documents' and only require a DHL Air Waybill to be completed. The following list explains what you need to do in order to ship various commodities.

Document Commodities
(Require a DHL Air Waybill) Commodities where you should contact your local customer service Department to clarify shipping requirements.

Advertising brochures/pamphlets
Airline tickets, issued/validated
Annual reports
Artwork inc.drawings/proofs/layouts
Blank forms
Blueprints
Booklets, brochures (non-adv.)
Books: hardbk/paperbk non-comm. use
Catalogues
Charts/graphs
Cheques, cashier (NI)
Documents, general business
Invoices, not blank
Labels
Magazines, periodicals, journals
Manuals, technical
Manuscripts
Maps
Microfiche & microfilm
Music, printed or manuscript
Newspapers
Pamphlets
Passports
Photographs
Photos as part of business reports
Plans/drawings-arch/indust/eng. pur
Price lists
Price tickets for garments
Shipping schedules
Visa applications

All other commodities should be shipped via DHL Worldwide Parcel Express and should be accompanied by an Air Waybill and Invoice.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Restrictions

If your shipment exceeds any of the following limits, it may require special handling, please contact your local country customer service department.

Size: Length 100 cms (39 ins), Width 100 cms (39 ins), Height 100 cms (39 ins)
Weight: Max. weight per shipment 100.0 kgs (220.5 lbs), Max. weight per piece 100.0 kgs (220.5 lbs)

©2007 DHL International GmbH. All Rights Reservedv

-- August 21, 2007 5:49 PM ∞

---

Sara wrote:

And a further interview of the same author as my previous post, with video from FOX's America's Newsroom which seems to indicate that the strike won't be of such a scale so as to be an interference in the fortunes of the Dinar. Plans so far say it would be quick and will not involve troops on the ground.
Quote:

Former CIA officer: US to attack Iran within 6 months
David Edwards and Muriel Kane
Published: Tuesday August 21, 2007

Fox News asked former CIA field officer Bob Baer on Tuesday whether the US is "gearing up for a military strike on Iran." Baer has written a column for Time indicating that Washington officials expect an attack within the next six months.

"I've taken an informal poll inside the government," Baer told Fox. "The feeling is we will hit the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps." His Time column also suggested that "as long as we have bombers and missiles in the air, we will hit Iran's nuclear facilities."

Baer explained that what his sources anticipate is "not exactly a war." He said the administration is convinced "that the Iranians are interfering in Iraq and the rest of the Gulf" but that "if there is an attack on Iran it would be very quick, it would be a warning."

"We won't see American troops cross the border. ... If this is going to happen, it's going to happen very quickly and it's going to surprise a lot of people," said Baer. "I hope I'm wrong frankly, but we're going to see."

The following video is from Fox's America's Newsroom, broadcast on August 21: see url below

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Former_CIA_agent_US_to_attack_0821.html

-- August 21, 2007 9:40 PM ∞

---

Steven wrote:

Rob N,

This is the from another site, and is the answer you want from Mr I at Warka,

This information is entirely false and we happily invite foreigners to invest in our bank as we strongly believe that they represent a big part of our bank and a leading factor behind its continuous success and groth.

We will continue to serve our esteemed foreign clients the best ensuring they receive better banking servces and care than that received at home.

Warka is your bank and that of all our foreign clients.

Best regards,
Mr. I.
Deputy Managing Director
International Affairs.

Yoo know as well as I do we get some plums that come on and say a load of B-S

I like a brain dead dum dum, sent some money by wire via the german bank, and I forgot to put my account number on it, so I sent an Email to Mr I. with what info and numbers I had, and told him I would leave it in his most capable hands, and I got an Email from him saying he has got it and has put it into my dinar account, it was for $1,278 that got me 1,585,998 dinars, so I now have a balance of 4,450,111, earning 11% and about 2,000,000 shares

The Arab world likes paper money and not coins, hence they had a half dinar and a quarter dinar
as walking around in your night shirt not a lot of room for coins.

like I said you can have cash dinars in your hand, cash in an Iraqi bank and cash in the ISX, like a three horse race and I have bet on all three, you have just bet on the one, nothing wrong with that, I went in the ISX as it looked like it would make money before the dinar is RVd.

If you have any probs send an email to, Mr I. ifrd@warksinvestmentbank.com he is a good egg

For a good read try, http://www.oilvoice.com/petrel_resources_review_of_operations_iniraq_and_jord...

Have a nice day and stay lucky, Steve.

-- August 21, 2007 9:58 PM ∞

---

Steven wrote:

Sorry, just go on the, oilvoice.com

-- August 21, 2007 10:08 PM ∞

---

Steven wrote:

All,

I am sure I will be put right, if any of this is not right.

The garden of Eden was in Iraq

Mesopotamia, which is now Iraq, was the cradle of civilization

Noah built the ark in Iraq

The Tower of Babel was in Iraq

Abraham was from Ur, which is in Southern Iraq

Isaacs wife Rebekah is from Nahor, which is in Iraq

Jacob met Rachel in Iraq

Jonah preached in Nineveh, which is in Iraq

Assyria, which is in Iraq, conquered the ten tribes of Israel

Amos cried out in Iraq

Babylon, which is in Iraq, destroyed Jerusalem

Daniel was in the lions den in Iraq, (Jesus had also been in Iraq
as the forth person in the Fiery Furnace)

Belshazzar, the king of Babylon saw the, writing on the wall

Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon, carried the Jews captive into Iraq

Ezekiel preached in Iraq

The wise men were from Iraq

Peter preached in Iraq

The Empire of Man, described in Revelation is called Babylon, which was a city in Iraq

Israel is the nation most often mentioned in the Bible, who is second, Iraq
However, that is not the name used in the Bible.
The names used in the Bible are, Babylon, Land of the Shinar, and Mesopotamia, which means between the two rivers more exactly between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers

The name Iraq, means country with deep roots

Indeed Iraq is a country with deep roots and is a very significant country in the Bible

No other nation, except Israel, has more history and prophecy associated with it than Iraq

This was from the same guy who sent me the bit about America with the eagle and Saddam ect.

Have a nice day and stay lucky, Steve.

-- August 21, 2007 10:38 PM ∞

---

Laura Parker wrote:

Sara,

Thank you for the information on the news articles. However, I believe they are wrong on the extent of the hit on Iran.

The U.S. may hit the revoluntary guard as suggested in these articles.

However, I believe the main objective of President Bush is going to be to hit the Nuclear facilities in Iran. Why would President Bush be requesting Bonker Busting Bombs from congress? This is not to go after the guard.

Laura Parker

-- August 21, 2007 11:13 PM ∞

---

Laura Parker wrote:

1967: THE KREMLIN PREPARES FOR WAR -ROSENBERG-EPICENTER CONT'D:

War clouds had been building for months. The Israelis found themselves increasingly surrounded by Soviet-backed forces of the Arab and Islamic world, all of whose leaders were vowing to "throw the Jews into the sea" and the Israelis were considering striking first. The element of surprise might be their only hope of survival, they figured. But President Lyndon Johnson had warned Israeli prime minister Levi Eshkol in no uncertain terms that such a move would be a serious mistake.

As historian Michael B. Oren noted in his highly praised book Six Days of War: June 1967 and the Making of the Modern Middle East, Johnson sent a secret message to Eskhol, saying, "It is essential that Israel not take any preemptive military action and thereby make itself responsible for he initiation of hostilities. Preemptive action by Israel would make it impossible for the friends of Israel to stand at your side." Oren noted that Johnson specifically "warned of the possibility of direct Soviet intervention.

Marshal Andrei Antonovich Grechko, the Soviet deputy defense minister, had told his Egyptian counterparts in Cairo that the Kremlin had dispatched "destroyers and submarines to the waters near Egypt, some armed with missiles and secret weapons" to help wipe out the Zionists. One of Israel's top experts on Soviet foreign policy told Israeli Defense Forces intelligence that "the USSR would muster all it's influence and power to maintain its Middle East position." When asked if the Soviets would intervene directly, the expert replied, "Of course." Soviet premier Aleksey Kosygin, meanwhile, sent a cable to Prime Minister Eshkol, warning "If the Israeli Government insists on taking upon itself the responsibility for the outbreak of armed confrontation then it will pay the full price of such an action."

But at 8:44am on the morning of June 5, 1967, Eshkol sent an urgent message back to President Johnson informing him that the it was too late. War had begun.

Explaining his rationale for the preemptive strike Israel had just launched, Eshkol wrote:

After weeks in which our peril has grown day by day, we are now engaged in repelling the aggression which (Egyptian president) Nasser had been building up against us. Israel's existence and integrity have been endangered. The provocative (Arab) troop concentrations in Sinai, now amounting to five infantry and two armored divisions; the placing of more that 900 tanks against our southern frontier;...the illegal blockade of the Straits of Tiran;...the imminent introduction of MiG-21 aircraft under Iraqi command (into the theater); Nasser's announcement of "total war against Israel" and of his basic aim to annihilate Israel...All of this amounts to an extraordinary catalogue of aggression, abhorred and condemned by the world opinion and in your great country and amongst all peace-loving nations.

Eshkol also noted that three Israeli towns had been bombed that morning by Arab forces, citing these as the last straws that led to war. He thanked Johnson for America's support and expressed hope that "our small nation can count on the fealty and resolution of its greatest friend." But he also had a request: that the U.S. "prevent the Soviet Union from exploiting and enlarging the conflict" at this, Israel's greatest "hour of danger."

"Eshkol knew and feared the Russians," noted Michael Oren. "War with Syria (and Egypt) was risky enough; with the USSR, it would be suicidal." But Eshkol calculated that without U.S. support, the Soviets would find themselves compelled to get involved directly. Moscow had "invested massively in the Middle East, about 2 billion in military aid alone--1700 tanks, 2400 artillery pieces, 500 jets, and 1400 advisers--since 1956, some 43 percent of it to Egypt.

Sure enough, as the Israelis demolished the forces of the Arab coalition over the next three days and captured the Sinai, the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and the Golan Heights, reunified the holy city of Jerusalem, and began an offensive against Damascus, Moscow saw itself staring into the face of a geopolitical disaster. Those were Soviet-made arms being seized and distroyed. Those were billions of dollars in Soviet funding to their Arab client states being poured down the drain. And--it would later be learned by the U.S. and Israeli intelligence--the Egyptian war plan itself (code named Operation Conqueror) had actually been written in 1966 by the Soviets. As a result, the Soviets feared their prestige was quickly unraveling.

U.S. intelligence was already picking up signs of this fear in the Kremlin. In the "President's Daily Brief" on June 9, for example, the CIA informed President Johnson that "the Soviets are finding it hard to conceal their shock over the rapid Egyptian military collapse. A Soviet official (identity still classified) could not understand 'how our intelligence could have been so wrong.' He asked desparingly, 'How could we have gotten into such a mess?'"

So the Kremlin decided to dramatically up the ante.

On June 10, at 8:48am Washington time, Soviet premier Aleksey Kosygin used the "hotline" to call President Johnson in the White House Situation Room. His message was as blunt as it was unnerving: "A very crucial moment has now arrived which force use, if (Israeli) military action are stopped in the next few hours, to adopt an independent decision. We are ready to do this. However, these actions may bring us into a clash which will lead to a grave catastrophe...We propose that you demand from Israel that it is not fulfilled, necessary actions will be taken, including military."

The Soviets quickly broke off diplomatic relations with Israel, and the Soviet-bloc government of Czechoslovakia and Bulgaria soon followed.

CIA Director Richard Helms would later recall that the conversations in the Situation Room for the next several hours were in "the lowest voices he had ever heard in a meeting of that kind" and that "the atmosphere was tense" as the president and his most senior military, diplomatic, and intelligence advisors contemplated the possibilty of a direct Soviet strike at Israel.

Johnson, a devoted friend of Israel and an ardent anti-Communist, was not prepared to kowtow to Moscow or let Israel be destroyed. He immediately ordered the U.S. 6th Fleet in the Mediterrean to turn around--it was heading west toward the Strait of Gibraltar--and steam toward Israel as a show of solidarity and to warn the Soviets not to get directly involved.

He did the right thing, for according to Isabella Ginor, a Russian born correspondent for the BBC World Service and other international news services, "new evidence reveals that the Soviets were indeed posied to attack Israel...and had been preparing for such a mission all along."

On June 10,2000--thirty-third anniversary of Kosygin's ominous hotline threat to Nixon--Ginor published an article in The Guardian (London) entitled "How the Six Day War Almost Led to Armageddon: New Evidence of the 1967 Soviet Plan to Invade Israel Shows How Close the World Came to Nuclear Conflict." In December of that year, she published a longer and more detailed article in the Middle East Review of International Affairs entitled "The Russians Were Coming: The Soviet Military Threat in the 1967 Six-Day War." In these and other articles, she quoted Soviet military officials who paint a fragmentary but still disturbing picture of the attack that was being prepared.

Ginor noted that "in his recently published memoirs, Nikita S. Khruschev asserts that the USSR's military command first encouraged high-ranking Egyptian and Syrian delegations, in a series of 'hush-hush' mutual visits, to go to war, then persuaded the Soviet political leadership to support these steps, in full knowledge they were aimed at starting a war to destroy Israel."

Soviet acting defense minister Andrei A. Grechko and KGB Chairman Yuri V. Andropov, meanwhile, "were pressing for the immediate dispatch of Soviet forces to the Middle East." Retired Soviet air force lieutenant Yuri V. Nastenko confirmed in 1998 that bomber and fighter jets, such as the MiG-21s that were under his command, were put on full operational alert on the evening of June 5, 1967, and that he was convinced this was in prepartion for "real combat."

Yuri N. Khripunkov, a former Soviet naval officer who was serving on one thirty Soviet warships that had been moved from the Black Sea southward to the Mediterranean in June 1967, told Ginor that he and his colleagues were preparing to unleash Soviet forces onto the Israeli mainland. His own platoon, he said, was "ordered to penetrate Haifa--Israel's main commercial harbor and naval base." Russian professor Alexsandr K. Kislov, who was stationed in the Middle East in 1967, told Ginor that the strike force the Soviets had prepared for insertion into Israel included "desant (landing) ships with well-prepared marines."

Some respected historians and diplomats have disputed the notion that the Soviets were planning to attack Israel in 1967. But while the evidence available from declassified documents and interviews with direct participates may not yet be conclusive, it is compelling. What's more, Soviet premier Kosygin's threat of direct military intervention into the 1967 was with Israel alone stands as chilling evidence of Moscow's historic and recent animus toward the Jewish state--as as a warning of things to come.

---end of chapter---

I have given the history of Russia's threat to middle east to show that this threat has been ungoing. In 1991, Russia's economy collapse. Since then, the Russians have been trying to recover. I did a little research and found that Russia's economic budget is composed of: 55% natural gas; 19% oil; 6% Hydro energy; 5% nuclear; and 16% coal. Russian has the larges natural gas reserves.

Russia's economy in my own opinion, could probably recover, if Russia was not providing arms out of her national economy because of it's current foreign policy. While it is true that Russia's economy is vulernable to the rise and fail of natural gas and oil, Russia could be pursuing other industries to get cash reserves.

Russia's continued foreign policy of forming alliances with terrorist organizations, Arab/Moslems and in particular Iran is most troubling.

Laura Parker

-- August 22, 2007 9:18 AM ∞

---

Rob N. wrote:

All:

The Kurdish miracle

Haaretz - By Zvi Bar'el

ERBIL, NORTHERN IRAQ - All the important people in Iraqi Kurdistan can be found in the Charwa Chra hotel restaurant, in the center of Erbil. The director-general of the new airport; the communications minister, there with his family; senior officials from the Kurdish government; and some rich Iraqis who have found temporary refuge in the hotel, until they decide whether to invest in Kurdistan or continue on to some European country. Rawand Darwesh, a senior Kurdish official, and Hamin Hassan, who was partner to the civilian social revolution in Kurdistan, are among the guests.

Darwesh was a member of the first group of outstanding students who received a Fulbright scholarship to study for a year in the United States. When he returned home, he quickly became involved in government activity. Hamin Hassan helped found the institute for human and civil rights in Kurdistan, in 2002, and later went to specialize in election supervision, in Jordan.

"Here the parliament has passed a law that stipulates that any murder is a murder," Hassan says. "There is no longer leniency for murdering women in the pretext of preserving family honor. This is not Iraq, where people who murder over family honor enjoy special privileges under the law. Moreover, our prime minister has called for setting up a hotline at police stations for abused women."

The police academy has begun accepting female cadets to assist women and victims of domestic violence. "They have an address here," Hassan says. But when he says "here," he is referring to the region of Kurdistan, which so far has only three sub-districts - Erbil, Duhok and Sulaimaniya. Residents hope that by next November, if and when a referendum is held, another three sub-districts will join the district. "This is not the Iraqi government," says Hassan. "I am referring only to the Kurdish law."

This is the heart of Iraq's anomaly. The Kurdish region is run as if it were a completely independent state. The Kurdish flag flies over the huge parliament building, not the Iraqi flag. At night, lights in the shape of the Kurdish flag light the streets of Erbil. The Iraqi flag cannot be seen here, and people even decline to use Arabic, the official language of the state.

A friend of Darwesh's explains that the Iraqis, particularly the Shi'ites, still consider the Kurds to be Israeli allies, even though Israel turned them a cold shoulder more than three decades ago. "One day, while traveling north from Baghdad, we were stopped at a Shi'ite roadblock," his friend says. "Three of the passengers said they were headed for Mosul. The fourth said, by mistake, that he was going to Erbil. The Shi'ite guard shouted out to his commander: 'Three of them are okay. One is going to Israel.' As you can understand, they consider Erbil Israel, because it is the capital of the Kurdish district."

At the table, laden with Kurdish delicacies, the conversation returns to women and human rights. "We still have a long way to go in this respect," Hassan says. "We have to educate an entire nation to new principles - particularly those outlying villages, which have fewer western influences."

Hassan, who was a Peshmerga fighter and an announcer on the underground Kurdish television network, admits that even he sometimes finds it difficult to live by all those new values he preaches. "If my sister wants to marry someone of a lower standing, less worthy of her, I'll try to persuade her, perhaps pressure her, to accept my values. Our women received freedom too quickly, as if in an explosion," he says.

Two days later, Abdel Salaam Barwary explains the problem. Barwary is one of Iraq's most influential analysts, the former bureau head for Kurdish Regional Government President Massoud Barzani, and currently the director of the Kurdish center for advancing democracy and human rights. "People want to know whether democracy means we will lose all our old values, if it means we will lose control of our wives and daughters, if democracy means sexual freedom," he says. "We still have a great deal of work to do in this field, particularly given that some of our ministers do not exactly understand what we are doing and are not exactly convinced that this is the best thing for the Kurdish state."

In my prior trips to Kurdistan between 1995 and 2004, there were no conversations of this type. The excitement generated by the war and the victory over Saddam Hussein, the relative quiet, the still-"reasonable" number of dead for a war, and especially the uncertain future all led to questions and conversations about physical survival and livelihood. This kicked off the gradual process of commemoration and remembering. People felt the fight was over, victory was assured and the Kurds were on their way to a state of their own - or at least to taking a healthy bite out of the Iraqi regime that tried to destroy them.

Now, things look totally different. The signs of a revolution are evident at the border crossing between Turkey and Iraq. The long lines of trucks, stretching for kilometers, are not waiting to enter Iraq to smuggle out oil. Instead, they bear bags of cement, building iron, food products, textiles, electronics - everything a rehabilitating country needs. These goods will not reach Baghdad or Basra. The trucks will stop at the new stores in the Kurdish district, at Erbil's glittering New City commercial center, or by the cranes building the "Italian colony" or the "English village" - single-family homes slated for rich locals or foreigners.

Traffic at the crossing moves quickly and efficiently - so long as the computer does not break down for an hour (like when we were supposed to get a stamp allowing us to cross into Iraq) or if the clerk does not take another hour-long lunch break. That, after all, is acceptable in Europe, and a country that aspires to be part of Europe must ensure its clerks have a suitable lunch break.

We finally receive our two stamps, and a minute later, we cross into Kurdish Iraq. We hear the same questions we heard last time: "How can we visit Israel? Is there work for us there? Do only Jews get entry visas to Israel?" The transit station director has friends in Israel, immigrants from Duhok. He would very much like to visit them, but does not know how to get a visa. Here, Israel is considered a land of dreams. We later learn that not only Israel, but also the Israelis - at least the Jewish Israelis - are viewed here as superior entities.

Economic boom

The trip from the border crossing to Erbil takes three hours. The temperature outside is above 40 degrees Celsius, but our air conditioning is effective. We sit back, watching the small commercial centers that have sprouted up over the past two years in the town of Zakho , on the way to Duhok. Shomal, a customs employee who drives me along Duhok's main road, explains how prices have risen. Three years ago, a dunam plot in Duhok sold for $1,000-$5,000. Now, 200-meter apartments can sell for $150,000, while private homes cost as much as $300,000.

Rich Iraqis fleeing the war and Kurds from abroad are buying these houses, Shomal says. But there are also local residents who have earned a lot of money in this economic boom, and can afford the houses, too. The growth is evident on the outskirts of Erbil, where new clusters of single-family homes have popped up. "All of the houses were bought before the building began and now people are searching for new plots to build on," says Darwesh, who bought a large apartment in one of the beautiful towers next to the Italian Colony.

The buildings in this neighborhood are not yet finished. There are many building foundations and frames, stylized steel balustrades, and a few touches of finishing. But the purchasers are not worried. The company has promised that the apartments will be ready in a few months. This economic boom becomes even more amazing to behold when one remembers that in Kurdistan, like the rest of Iraq, there is no such thing as a mortgage or a bank loan. Everything here is bought in cash. Iraqi dinars that are worth 1,200 to the dollar - houses, cars, trips, furniture. You cannot pay by check, credit card or bank order.

It is hard to say how prices compare here. A new Land Cruiser sells for a mere $30,000, but the New City supermarket has European-level prices. Ice cream costs $1, but a meal at a middle-class restaurant can cost as much as $25 per person - almost five times more than it did three years ago.

Erbil district governor Nawzad Hadi Maulud says the main problem facing his region is electricity. An electrical engineer by training, the governor finishes work at 9 P.M. Some of the region's electricity comes from Turkey, which sometimes cuts the current on a political whim. Other suppliers include small stations set up by the government, but these are too small, and too far from the city. Most of Erbil's electricity comes from private generators.

People do not pay for the state-supplied electricity. "How can I charge money for a bad service?" the governor says. "After all, I can provide electricity for only a limited number of hours per day. First I have to prove that I can provide excellent service, and only then can I begin collecting money for it. The main problem is that I have to deal with the memories of the Saddam Hussein era. His administration provided very good services for free or cheap. Now, if I provide a service that is not very good, people will compare it with what they had during that period, and conclude there is no good reason to pay for it."

All municipal services - medical services, university education, water, sewage and more - are free. However, in this state where the government provides everything for nothing, there are no welfare services or national insurance. There are also no health maintenance organizations. But most of all, there are no bank fees - because there are no banks. Life is carried out in cash, and businesses use banks in Turkey or Jordan.

"We do not have a real infrastructure for business," says an adviser to Barzani, the regional president. "There is money but there is no strategic thinking. We aspire for a well-balanced and independent economy, and the Kurdish region has adopted an excellent investment law. We have a great deal to offer investors, especially security and tranquility, but meanwhile, everything is being conducted in a tribal fashion, with written notes."

If the building impetus one can see here is the result of written notes, one could imagine how far Kurdistan could get with an organized administration.
(http://www.kurdishaspect.com/doc082007BZ.html)

Thanks,

Rob N.

-- August 22, 2007 9:51 AM ∞

---

Rob N. wrote:

All:

DNO says two Tawke wells confirm oil deposits

Norwegian independent oil producer DNO said two new wells at its Tawke field in northern Iraq have both confirmed oil deposits.
(www.noozz.com)

Thanks,

Rob N.

-- August 22, 2007 9:53 AM ∞

---

Rob N. wrote:

All:

US 'frustrated' at situation in southern Iraq: general 45 minutes ago

LONDON (AFP) - The United States is frustrated at the deteriorating security situation in southern Iraq, a retired senior US general said Wednesday amid continued talk about a British pull-out from the region.

ADVERTISEMENT

In an interview on BBC radio, General Jack Keane, a former vice-chief of staff of the US Army, agreed with recent media reports that Washington was dissatisfied at the increased violence in and around the port city of Basra.

"There is some frustration with the troops being out at the airport primarily training the Iraqi 10th division and not as engaged as they had been in the past in what is taking place in central Basra and the surrounding communities," said Keane, who was an adviser to the US Iraq Study Group.

"They have never had enough forces to truly protect the people, a mission similar to what the coalition forces are taking on in Baghdad. But I think there is a general disengagement from what the key issues are around Basra.

"I would imagine that's where the source of frustration is."

Britain has about 5,500 troops currently based at Basra Airport and Basra Palace, although the small contingent at the latter is due to move out within weeks.

There are plans to reduce numbers