|
Post by spygirl on Feb 25, 2014 20:17:40 GMT -5
Interesting and informative video, in terms of scale. Thats an awful lot of paper! Since replying earlier to this thread (in which I mention the idea that 2.3 trillion in gold would be a logistical nightmare), a friend of mine helped me with some of the trickier elements of the mathematics behind working out how much space would be taken up by the amount in gold.
If we took my calculations from my previous response :
... and assuming any level of accuracy in that, what so ever, my buddy reckons you could fit that much gold into a 20 metre cube. So in actual fact, it might be easier to consolidate the cash into gold. I mean, at a value of well over $400,000 a bar, the gold would take up less space than the same value in paper or coin. It would, however, be heavy as all hell.
|
|
|
Post by lucky4u on Feb 25, 2014 20:25:03 GMT -5
They did and it was noticed. Maybe not over 5-10years. More likely over 20-30 years. I am sure many of those who noticed had incentive to look the other way.
I'm not one of those who think Bush or Rumsfeld was directly responsible for the attacks, I believe they were merely puppets getting their strings pulled by much more powerful forces. 9/11 reminds me of a conspiracy theory I heard from the Kennedy era. Essentially the Joint Chiefs of Staff and CIA wanted to stage false flag attacks all over the US and elsewhere to possibly gain popular support to invade Cuba. Kennedy fiercely rejected this and many believe this played an important role in his assassination. Today it is known as Operation Northwoods.
|
|
|
Post by jennyfromtheblock on Feb 25, 2014 21:23:16 GMT -5
They probably laundered it into the secret space program. I don't have any evidence, but that's the kind of money you'd need to run one. I mean, those black triangles don't come free.
|
|
|
Post by fr33dom on Feb 25, 2014 23:09:08 GMT -5
Interesting.... Very convenient... Of course if you provided a link we could discuss it.
I found this of Rumsfeld talking about the attack at the pentagon and the events of that day make of it what you will but he does say that at first he did not know what had hit the pentagon but that a air force coronal had told him it was a plane.
So to be clear i really am no fan of Rumsfeld
But i really would love it if you could please show us all your source with Rumsfeld admitting to a missile hitting the pentagon on air and it in its full context.
|
|
|
Post by augustusmasonicus on Feb 25, 2014 23:17:53 GMT -5
Nice story dude.
So you are now saying that the whole reason he admitted to it was so that he could distract the pentagon into looking for the money.
Really.....
Because this had been going on as you say for a long time, and its not like he had everyone looking down the back of couches for nickels and dimes (up to the value of $2.3T) soon as he came out with that to the media.
Sorry but your explanation does not pass my "logic" test.
|
|
|
Post by agentmulder on Feb 25, 2014 23:26:56 GMT -5
Pretty sure the whole point of announcing the unaccounted for trillions had nothing to do with 911 other than never letting a good tragedy go to waste. Assuming the 911 conspiracy perpetrators (within the White House) were true, then the only point I'd see of them doing it would be for it to get lost in the 24hr news cycle knowing that what's about to come will make it irrelevant anyway. What I do consider curious is the announcement made by Rumsfeld was on a Tuesday. Why is that curious? Well I'd expect the government to drop a bombshell like that on a Friday when people aren't listening and by Monday Justin Beiber would have been caught with his pants down. There is also the argument that the story was reported back in March the same year, which was true but that's not the same as a national tv news discussion. Had 911 not happened and Rumsfeld still made the announcement it surely would have made the rounds through all the talking heads ad naseam. Is this proof of anything? No, just curious. Also curious, is the debate and discussion about how or why it was reported like it was but still to this day simply viewed as something expected by our government. Never held to account, but again the records were destroyed right?
|
|
|
Post by bonesmason on Feb 25, 2014 23:51:12 GMT -5
The debunkers should stay away from this subject, imo. It makes you look really gullible when you will believe things like the Pentagon not being able to account for 2.3 trillion dollars, because of dodgy accounting. Really debunkers? Really? You know that at the time that amount of money was almost 10 years of the total defense budget. So some bad accounting lost track of almost ten years worth of their budget, sounds like it's not the truthers that have some explaining to do.
|
|
|
Post by superxsoldier on Feb 27, 2014 5:55:58 GMT -5
Nice story dude. So you are now saying that the whole reason he admitted to it was so that he could distract the pentagon into looking for the money. Really..... Because this had been going on as you say for a long time, and its not like he had everyone looking down the back of couches for nickels and dimes (up to the value of $2.3T) soon as he came out with that to the media. Sorry but your explanation does not pass my "logic" test. So you think none of the top brass at the Pentagon wouldn't have been dealing with 2.3 trillion that was reported missing the next day??? Ya know just because ya can spell "logic" ,,doesn't mean you know what it means
|
|
|
Post by area51 on Feb 27, 2014 6:28:02 GMT -5
Can't find it right now. It was on youtube years ago. Google searches are censored so I'll have to really do some digging to locate it. If I remember correctly is was an interview Rumsfeld gave on 9/11 or 9/12 and he clearly stated a missile hit the Pentagon.
There are a lot of live news reports from 9/11 that are now nowhere to be found. I'll find it and share it.
|
|
|
Post by hitman on Feb 27, 2014 6:57:02 GMT -5
It'll be behind the cushion's on the sofa in the Pentagon. Maybe the military are stashing it to pay off the national debt.
|
|