KTFA

  In Uncategorized 

Frank26: United Nations

Treasury – UN Operational Rates of Exchange

IMO, significant find because just the fact that this is the first time the U.N. has posted and recognized the Iraq Dinar since March 1, 2010 says something-even though the rate is 1170..something is about to change…soooon!!!

Current    UN Operational Rates of Exchange

https://treasury.un.org/operationalrates/OperationalRates.php#I

care to comment. Thanks.  KTFA Frank

************

JR1353:  WOW .. Very Interesting .. .. Frank, could this mean that IYO, this also means that the U.S. Congress has finally enacted the 2010 Monetary Reform Act, that they’ve been sitting on since 2010?

Thank You & your teams for all of your efforts, and this juicy info ..

************

CShessman:  Interesting indeed Frank, especially that on Dec. 1, 2015 the Exchange Rate is supposed to be 1166. 1170 was back in Feb. 2012 was the last time it was that figure 1166 since…

************

Seven:  Interesting. You can also see with the strength in the USD, other countries currencies are lower as well. It would be nice if the U.N. begins recognizing the IQD internationally (IR) on the first of December 2015 but I can wait until the 15th if I have to.

************

Bulldawgal: We have such smart people at this site!!! Great Thought!!

Hmmmm……the only thing that is coming to me is that it is OFFICIAL that they are international…..not like, they have “done what they need to do” but they have “received the badge”.

And if that is not the case…….I am at least POSITIVE that this is “one giant step for dinariankind” and am very excited!!

************

Rlnbwnk:  The UN has confirmed what Frank has been telling us. We are now taxing to the runway preparing for take off. Thanks mi amigo

************

Carolyn:  Ok I’ll play …..You have always said they will not broad cast it only the ones in the know will be watching    So I think ……UN today. “ON YOUR MARK”

Dec. 8. “GET SET”        Dec. 15. “GO”

WOW I like this GAME

************

Strongcbm: This says to me setting the stage for “International Readiness” “United with the Nations”…..

*************

Kmamgmt:  One thing that strikes me is the time frame mentioned, March 2010 being the last time the U.N. has posted and recognized the Iraqi Dinar. If I remember correctly, January 2010, or maybe even 1st quarter of 2010, was a time when Iraq was supposed to / expected to raise the value of the IQD. If the U.N. hasn’t posted it or recognized it since then, but they have now, then it seems this could be yet another indication (this time from the U.N.) that we are in, or approaching, a SERIOUS time frame to raise that rate.

**************

Mountainman:  IMO………….11-30-2015 is a “REVIEW” from the IMF regarding China’s INCLUSION into the SDR basket=ASSET Backed COUNTRIES CURRENCY=the WORLD saying to IRAQ,IRAN, via the UN,IMF,USA, and THE COALITION……….Hey IRAQ WE are ready for YOU and YOU are ready for…….US!!!!!!!

Sooooo Zoom,Zoom,Zoom…………to the MOON Alice!!!

**************

Pappa-J:  HEHEEEHEEHEEHHEEEE!!!! AS DOC WOULD SAY!!! OZ NO BEEN TELLING TRUTH EVER, IMO!!!!

SEEMS TO ME THAT UN RECOGNIZING THE DINAR AS US BEGINS TO COME OUT OF FOOD COMA SMELLS LIKE THE PIE IS ON THE SHELF WAITING TO BE SERVED ( DRS HAS ALWAYS WANTED A LONG WEEKEND) AS IN 01 DEC SHOW TIME( RI)( MY NOTES SAY 5-10 DAYS, that was the pattern with Kuwait, WITH 08 DEC BEING ( RV ) TIME , THE PATTERN WOULD FIT IRAQ ,THEY HAVE LOVED THE 7TH TO LAUNCH ( RELIGIOUS REASONS) 8TH TO SHOW !!!!

SOOOO THEY MOVED IT UP AINT GONNA BREAK MY HEART ,I’LL JUST BREAK INTO THE SNOOPY DANCE!!!! YEA PROBABLY WRONG BUT IT SOUNDS GOOD!!!! PJ

EITHER WAY A DECEMBER TO REMEMBER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

**************

Torch123:  The UN operational rates would be another piece to the puzzle. Below you will find what I believe is another. (Will the “Fed” just go away???) Things are progressing nicely! Enjoy the weekend!!

sorry, click on the link for pictures…..
http://www.nysun.com/editorials/the-yellen-letter/89354/

Janet Yellen’s astonishing letter to the Speaker of the House, Paul Ryan, is a sign that the central bank is panicking over the fact that Congress is unhappy with the job the central bank has been doing.

Mrs. Yellen’s letter, sent also to the minority leader, Nancy Pelosi, is a protest against a bill known as the Fed Oversight Reform and Modernization Act, which is nearing a vote in the House and would require the Fed to choose a rules for the formation of monetary policy and let the Congress and the public know what they are.

Wikipedia Commons

A SAGE’S WARNING: One of Janet Yellen’s greatest predecessors as chairman of the Federal Reserve, Paul Volcker, has said that the absence of a cooperatively managed, rules-based monetary system has not been a great success. The Congress is set to vote on whether the Fed should set a voluntary rule and disclose it to the public. Why is Mrs. Yellen protesting?

That has got to be one of the most gentle, democratic, transparent reforms in the history of democracy. It doesn’t require the Fed to stick to its monetary rules, just develop a set of guidelines and let the Congress know what they are. Yet Mrs. Yellen suggests that this mild measure would breach the Fed’s independence from the Congress that created it. Her letter is whiny, inaccurate, and threatening all at once, evincing an “it’s my ball and you can’t play with it” attitude.

One would think the FORM Act would be a lead pipe cinch in a democracy. Mrs. Yellen’s letter is particularly shocking given that it is precisely to the Congress that the Constitution grants the monetary powers. These include the power to borrow money on the credit of the United States, to coin money and regulate the value thereof, to provide for punishment of counterfeiting, to regulate commerce, and to fix the standard of weights and measures.

Congress could, if it wanted, dismantle the Federal Reserve entirely. It could refuse to confirm its governors. It could require that dollars be redeemed in gold. If the Fed doesn’t want to establish a voluntary, non-binding monetary guideline, the Congress could turn around and legislate a binding one. The Congress hasn’t — at least not yet — done any of those things. It is merely considering a bill requiring the Fed to establish its own rules and let the rest of us know what it is doing.

This, incidentally, has already passed the House Financial Services Committee, albeit on a party line vote, the way, say, Obamacare passed the Congress. Support for more oversight of the Fed, though, is far more bipartisan than Obamacare and the reforms are relatively mild. Audit the Fed, which would give Congress an on-going look at what the Fed is doing on monetary policy and is now a part of this bill, passed the House in September 2014 by a vote of 333 to 92, with something like 109 Democrats voting for the measure.

Why is Congress itching for more oversight of the Fed? The reason is that the Fed was culpable in the crisis of 2008. And there is a growing sense that errors by the Fed itself — with quantitative easing and zero interest rates — have retarded the recovery, turning the crisis into the Great Recession. The recession became a cruel jobs drought; the unemployment rate is still above the average through the whole generation of Bretton Woods; the employment participation rate is at a decades long low.

Mrs. Yellen’s predecessor, Ben Bernanke, may have written a memoir about his own courage to act, but Congress’s admiration of Mr. Bernanke’s courage isn’t as unalloyed as Mr. Bernanke’s admiration for his own courage (a federal court found he violated the Fifth Amendment in the AIG case). Given all this — and the fact that the Federal Reserve is beginning its second century — it is only natural that Congress start stepping up, a view supported by an array of distinguished figures.

A number of them — including Secretary of State George Shultz and Stanford economist John Taylor — were quoted last week in a press release of the House Financial Services Committee as supporting the measure and denying it would compromise the Fed’s position. But the most newsworthy quote was the one from a former Fed chairman, Paul Volcker, who doesn’t support the bill but nonetheless articulates the logic of it.

“By now I think we can agree that the absence of an official, rules-based cooperatively managed, monetary policy system has not been a great success,” the committee quotes the sage as saying (he made the remark in 2014). If the Fed does not want to reform itself — which is what the Congress is asking it to do — the result will eventually be less voluntary. Or maybe the Congress will start looking at the most logical and radical reform, the gold standard. Mrs. Yellen’s letter on that should be quite something.

Comment