The Latest from Eagle1 (4/7/2014)

A few months ago I did a post on Frank26's GCR (Global Currency Reset) intel guy, Eagle1.  In that post I not only rebutted his rubbish but I also provided links to establish who this poser is.  Since then he's been pretty quiet, but he popped up last Saturday night to update Frank's "family" on the mythical RV and GCR.  Below you will find his post along with a few comments from Yours Truly in bold black.






Good Afternoon, Family:

Frank is right! How's that for an introduction to this opinion piece?

Now, let me really mess with you! I'm also right! So how can that be? How can Frank be right that there is only an RV and not a GCR, while I'm right in saying that there IS and MUST BE a GCR?

Now that I have you thoroughly confused, let me take you into a little history of events and explain the why's and wherefore's of our diverging intel.

Everyone knows that George W. Bush signed Executive Order #13303 in 2003 making it lawful for Americans to purchase and hold the Iraqi Dinar, which would otherwise have been a sanctioned currency and unlawful to buy or sell.  Uh ..... no, we don't know this.  In fact the DOJ specifically addressed this lie (page 5).
....

Eagle1

We all know that the objective from Day One in the Bush Administration was for the Dinar to be restored to its original value, and with that restored value, create a flow of cash within our nation to not only pay for the Iraq War, but to at least pay off the Treasury's acknowledged public debt.  At the same time, it would bring to the American people a flow of finances and (for some) much wealth, resulting in a very big turnaround in our economy.  And how do we know this?  From dinar gurus like Frank?  There's certainly no documentation of anything like what you're saying.  Actually the Future of Iraq Project says nothing about flow of cash or paying for the war.  It just talks about the psychological impact of replacing the currency. HINT!!! "Psychologically significant" is another way of saying people will feel better about using a new currency with a higher value even though the net purchasing power hasn't changed. In other words, a lop. 

With all of the gold Iraq already had in its reserves -- never mind all the un-mined gold that the soldiers found under the streets and in otherwise unusual places -- by virtue of the fact that the US Treasury was holding trillions of Dinar in its reserves toward the expected date of the RV, the US Dollar would actually have some gold backing for the first time in decades.  This lie about the US Treasury holding trillions of dinar was also addressed by the DOJ.

No one is arguing with those facts. Of course they are, because they're not facts at all and you haven't provided any evidence to that effect.  

All of us have seen the events unfolding in Iraq bringing us step-by-step and closer to the day of the revalue of the IQD. So far so good?  Not really , but please continue.

What seems to have been lesser known is that members of the Bush Administration (whose names shall go unmentioned in this post) began to see the value of a global economic reset.  Again, no names ... no documentation ... no evidence to support what he says ... we're jut supposed to believe Eagle1 because he's such an honest guy.  After all, he's a minister.
There were other currencies whose values were operating under artificially low (and previously sanctioned) rates. Vietnam and Indonesia are two classic examples. Were there to be a revalue of those currencies and/or a restructuring of currency values based on actual fixed assets, this could fundamentally alter the global economies and restore some sanity to the way currencies were exchanged and commodities traded between countries.  There's nothing artificially low about the dong when you consider that their money supply is in the quadrillions.

Working with German economist and then-Managing Director of the IMF, Horst Köhler, at a meeting in Basel, Switzerland, a set of protocols began to be developed by which the member nations of the IMF would determine their respective asset bases against the amount of currency in use.  Not true.

By the time the Basel III Protocols were finally published in 2010 with then-Managing Director of the IMF, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, those protocols had undergone many iterations resulting in what was going to be a fundamental restructuring of the way banks managed their assets, along with new rules for measuring the stability of banks globally.  None of which has anything to do with this GCR flapdoodle.

Before any global reset could be implemented, however, there needed to be banking software and international exchange software developed which would accommodate all of the changes that were about to be implemented. 

Babylon II was the outgrowth of this process, gaining its name from Babylon, LTD, an Israeli software company based in Or Yehuda, Israel. Wikipedia says of this software, " Babylon is a tool used for translation and conversion of currencies, measurements and time, and for obtaining other contextual information."

Anyone who has spent any time at all in the computer industry working with translator programs will be acquainted with the Babylon Translator which, for a period of time, was bundled with Google as a language translator program. This is the same company that developed the new banking software.  I looked up the currency page on the Babylon translation website and here's what they say.  "Currency Dictionaries - Get instant translations and term definitions at a click customized to your field of interest- Free"  So you can clearly see that when Wikipedia refers to the translation and conversion of currencies, they're talking about the currency codes, terminology, and definitions.  It has nothing to do with converting exchange rates!

In February of 2012, this software began its installation process and testing throughout banks globally. Many of you will remember the glitches that took place with NASDAQ and the NYSE when they began to roll out the version of the software designed for trading in 2013, and we saw the exchanges go down for several hours because of problems in the software.  Okay, they went down for a few hours.  So how do you explain the 14 month downtime for this Babylon II implementation?

OK, that's some of the nuts and bolts behind both the RV and the GCR. Let's get to what appears to be a discrepancy between Frank's focus on the IQD RV and my emphasis on a Global Currency Reset, and why both of us are correct.

By the time we reached the maturity of the two processes for the revalue of the Dinar, and the implementation of the currency reset, none of the original players were involved.  I thought the global elites were pulling all the strings?  You know ..... the "Powers That Be"?

The Bush Administration was no longer in power, and while members of that administration were certainly invested in the respective outcomes, the Obama Administration had taken over.

Much of Frank's intel comes from folks who are connected to the current administration in one way or another, as well as his very dominant sources of intel from within Iraq. 

Much, if not most, of my intel comes from people who either were in the Bush Administration, or are connected currently to the IMF and the World Trade Organization, with only a couple of sources within the current administration. I actually think most of your intel comes out of your large intestine.  Ditto for Frankie.  

Here's where what appears to be a strong (albeit friendly) disagreement stems from.  The current administration is very pro-Iraqi RV. They want the U.S. to gain AND KEEP the upper hand globally where finances, and particularly the USD, are concerned. On the other hand, the current administration is very anti-GCR. Why, you ask?

We've seen a lot of talk and hullabaloo over the 2010 Code of Economic and Governance Reforms in the past two weeks. This past week, the Senate overwhelmingly passed a bill providing Ukraine financial aid in the face of its virtual cutoff from Russia. Included as a rider to that bill was this 2010 Code of Reforms being actively pushed by Treasury Secretary Jack Lew.  Pumpers like to throw out references to current events and people involved in those events.  It makes them sound like they know what they're talking about.  When Jack Lew became the head of the US Treasury they were all quick to point out that he worked in the Clinton administration when the budget was supposedly balanced  as a result of the windfall from the Kuwaiti RV (another pumper lie), and was surely put in place to oversee the revaluation of the Iraqi dinar.  What they didn't point out is that Lew joined the Clinton administration in 1993 and the Kuwaiti RV supposedly took place in 1991.  They also failed to mention that he left in 1994 and the budget wasn't balanced until 1998, nor did they mention that Lew's job was focused on AmeriCorps and health care reform.  Apparently most guru followers don't bother to fact check these things, but never fear ... Sammy's here!
  
That sounds like I just contradicted myself, doesn't it? I just said that the current administration is very anti-GCR, and yet Jack Lew, our gifted Treasury Secretary is pushing these IMF reforms. How can that be?

The 2010 Reforms were stripped from the bill before it went to the House of Representatives as already noted in a previous post, and the aid to Ukraine passed overwhelmingly, minus the IMF bill. Even yesterday, the 28th, Christine Lagarde was expressing her dismay and aggravation with Congress over its failure to pass these reforms.  More name dropping.  "Wow, this Eagle1 guy knows all about what's going on with the head of the UST and the IMF!!!  He's really got the scoop on the GCR!"  Anybody who knows how to read and knows how to use Google can look these names up.  However only pumpers can come up with such inane storylines.

So, to borrow a catch phrase from an old TV commercial, "Where's the Beef?"  Where indeed!!??

One of the principal provisions of the IMF Code of Economic and Governance Reforms keys in on the word, "Governance." These reforms include creating a 10-member governing board which includes Russia, China, Brazil and India -- among others. This governing board would, if agreed to by the U.S., put Russia on an even playing field with the United States as far as having a say in global economic issues.

With Russia having taken such an aggressive and adversarial stance with regard to Ukraine, its annexation of Crimea, its huge military buildup on the Ukrainian border, and what appears to be further adventurism towards Estonia and other neighbors, the last thing our Representatives in the House want to see is for Russia to have equal footing in the IMF on a governing board.  A common tactic of these intel gurus is to take current events and weave them together with a storyline about the RV/GCR.  If they really had the connections that they claim wouldn't they be able to tell us about events like Crimea ahead of time?  Remember, prior to the dinar revaluing from 1170:1 to 1166:1 in January of 2012 not one single stinking guru said anything about that small increase, but after it happened they all had their explanations of what it meant.  These guys have NO contacts, NO intel, and NO clue whatsoever what is going on with international negotiations and maneuverings.  They take everything from the same headlines that you and I have access to and then they fabricate.

Consider, also, the fact that Obama has placed sanctions on Russia, along with our European allies, because of Russia's adventurism.  More current events references, designed to build confidence in his expert analysis.
  
Obviously, the Obama administration has no particular love for China because of China's participation in the BRICS group, and its currency trading between these countries without the use of the USD. China could be tolerated on this governing board with some economic agreements between us, but under the present circumstances and the present regime in Russia, that will never happen!  The BRICS nations include Brazil and South Africa.  Obama has been to both countries since taking office and has expressed no hostility toward either because of their involvement in the BRICS alliance, so why would such an association be a problem with China?
  
Thus, as you see, the signing off on these reforms (which include this new governing board) is not something that is widely accepted within the current administration.

They are more than happy to see an RV because it does not require any acceptance of the IMF Reforms, and it solves our economic woes -- at least for the time being.

Christine Lagarde, on the other hand, is not about to stand by and allow the US to run away with this boon economically while the remaining 187 member nations gain little benefit. Some folks have suggested that because Christine is basically a socialist at heart, she and Obama are joined at the hip.  Oh Dear God!!!

The problem with that analysis is that Christine and Obama are galaxies apart when it comes to implementing their respective socialist policies. Oh for the love of ........  For Christine, her brand of socialism is to provide a more level playing field when it comes to making decisions that aid the developing and emerging economies of other nations. Hence, the 2010 Reforms.  Somebody shut him up!!!

Hopefully I'm drawing a picture that helps you understand the divergent views between the intel I receive and share, and that which Frank receives and shares with the family. If your sources are strongly pro-RV and strongly anti-GCR, then your view will be that if there ever is any such thing as a GCR, it's going to be way down the road.  And if neither one of you has any real sources, you're both just making everything up.

Under the present circumstances and view of this administration, were their agenda to succeed, Frank would be 100% correct. And -- based on the intel he has been given -- he IS correct!  Frank has never been right about anything.  I've done three posts on just how clueless the guy is.

http://dinardouchebags.blogspot.com/2011/12/frankly-reeking.html
http://dinardouchebags.blogspot.com/2012/07/frankly-reeking-ii.html
http://dinardouchebags.blogspot.com/2012/08/frankly-reeking-iii.html

On the other hand, knowing what I know from behind the scenes at the IMF, Christine isn't about to stand by and allow an RV of the IQD without other nations getting to join in this restructuring. 

Could we see an RV of the IQD and a later GCR? 

Sure! The kicker here is that "later" is going to be measured in microseconds, minutes or hours at worst -- not weeks or months. Everything is in play, and everything is in a state of readiness for both possibilities.

With the House and Senate at an apparent impasse over the "Governance Reforms" one wonders if there is any real solution, and the answer is, YES! I'm going to make what I believe is a simple proposal that I hope my friends on both sides of the aisles in the Senate and House of Representatives will take to heart.  I'm sure they're waiting with bated breath for your priceless advice.

As Senator Ted Cruz pointed out last week (and several members of the House concurred), with Putin and Russia so h*ll-bent on rebuilding the old Soviet Empire and reclaiming territories and nations they considered as "Soviet," the simple solution is to amend the Governance portion of the 2010 Reforms by removing Russia from the governing board of ten members, either substituting another acceptable nation in its place, or simply leaving Position 10 empty until such time as Russia complies with the demands to withdraw from the Ukraine, surrender the Crimea back to Ukraine and withdraw its forces from its western borders on Ukraine and Estonia. 

The alternative would be to simply hold the position open until such time as Russia has a more flexible leader, or one who is willing to partner with the rest of the nations in a peaceful way.  Okay, thanks Mr. Kissinger.  We'll get right on it.

The above solution, of course, would require the amended Reforms to go back to the other signing nations in order to get their agreement with the change. It is a relatively simple change that I believe most of the House and Senate would agree to, in fact with a "super veto-proof majority" that Obama could either sign or simply allow to become law without his signature. 

In view of Russia's belligerence and the already imposed sanctions by many of the signatory nations to the IMF, I believe this amendment could pass quickly and smooth the way for a Global Currency Reset.

Without this amendment, what we have is a stalemate between the U.S. and the IMF with the U.S. currently holding a complete veto capability to any change in the Reforms. 

Christine has made it clear to many that she is willing to bypass the U.S. and move ahead with the Global Currency Reset.  Christine Lagarde has never talked about a global currency reset where all currencies will be backed by precious metals.  When she talks about resets she's talking about economic reforms, banking reforms, and tax reforms.  A meeting is planned with the IMF and the World Bank on April 10 and 11.

It is conceivable that if we don't get an RV/GCR by that date that a decision could be made to move ahead unilaterally with the other nations. Am I predicting that? No. I'm expecting things to move without us having to reach such a confrontational stage.  I will predict that no GCR or substantial RV of the dinar will occur by April 10 of this or any other year.  

Keep your eyes peeled, folks! We're in the midst of something exciting, and whether we see it this weekend, next week, or the week after is less important than the fact that we are coming to the finish line! God is on the move!  The obligatory bone throw to the religious devotees.

Blessings on you.

Eagle1






It's unfortunate that so many people listen to the likes of these bozos.  Eagle1 has never produced a shred of evidence to support anything that he's saying about this reset, and there's a reason for that.  It's simply not true.  I understand that most people don't have the time to follow current geopolitical events and study the intricacies of economics.  They're too busy working, raising their families, and trying to get by.  That's why I'm here.  That's why Bagdad Invest is talking about this.  That's why Marcus Curtis is debunking this hokum.  And that's why John Jagerson has been telling people since 2009 that this is all a scam.  Fortunately many are catching on, because there are enough of us out here now sounding the alarm about these scammers to put the skids on their little dog and pony shows like this one.  

here is a quicky. try the new world order. do you think they want the average person to become rich?

Well there is an assumption in that statement that the NWO is a thing.  Who are they?

try  this for size sam  rothchilds bilderbergs  rockerfellers  morgans who have ripping everyone off for centurys as well as there side kicks. by the way you know they  control our federal reserve and the cbi around the world but since you are on so many sites you seem to be the resident expert you know this right?

I don't buy that they control the Fed.  Nor do I buy into the belief that they control the world.  Sure, wealthy people just like everybody else want to protect and promote their interests.  But the idea that they control all of the geopolitical events in the world including the mythical revaluation if the IQD is nonsense.