Saw the A-Team movie last night. A “guy movie” ball of fluff but nothing with Liam Neeson in it is a complete waste of time. Plus, I was the only one I knew (at the time) that actually really liked the television show.
The plot revolves around some counterfeit money plates that had been in Iran and then moved into Iraq and so on. According to the film the U.S. gave the Shah the plates. It’s just a movie that I’m sure took tons of artistic license, but is there any truth to this claim? I remember reading some years ago that a lot of counterfeit U.S. money was coming out of Iran and finding its way to Europe & Asia.
Any truth that we supplied the plates? What about the special paper and ink? Did we give that to the Shah too? If so, WHY?
Is funny money still coming out of Iran? Our bills have change significantly over that last 20 years. Bills that looked like the old style would stand out pretty much.
Also, in the movie Papillon prisoners are paid to catch special butterflies. These butterflies have their wings crushed up as the powder from that is used to make pigment for the ink that is used to print money with. Was there any truth to that? Is it still true?
No, we have never supplied any other nation with the ability to make US currency. It’s quite possible we supplied the Shah etc with the technology to make his currency in the same manner as we made ours back then. So, the “hook” in the film is entirely made up.
Cite? I don’t claim the movie was based on fact, nor that the U.S. did such a thing, but it hardly seems implausible. It would be a way to steer money to a regime without authorization and without direct cost to the taxpayer.
The CIA has provided assistance to drugdealers whom other branches of the U.S. government were fighting. If they’ve never supplied U.S. currency plates, it may be because they never thought of it.
“Hardly seems implausible?” I think the idea that the US government would facilitate the counterfeiting of US currency is about as implausible as you can get.
I used to have a link to the Treasury Department’s website that lists 207 countries that we have not supplied with the means to counterfeit US currency, but I can’t seem to find it.
But seriously, it is not reasonable to require a citation to refute an allegation from a lousy movie that is nothing more than a McGuffin. How is one to dig up a citation that we are not living an electronic dream world which our actual bodies supply power to a giant computer? Or a cite that disproves the existence of the Allspark?
Did I Say that they did? My goodness; we need lessons in English interpretation now.
We can agree to disagree on whether it’s implausible. You claimed something as fact without evidence. My claim is that you claimed something without evidence. My “cite” is your post.
I’ll agree that it seems far-fetched. OTOH, it does seem to be factual that it would be a cheap clandestine way to aid a regime; the CIA has done things more nonsensical; we know that regimes we don’t like (N. Korea, poss. Burma) are counterfeiting dollars and we do little about it; why not let our friends do it! BTW, just now (after my previous post) I did click on Wiki’s Super Dollar page to see
(But I’m not responsible for any idiocies in that cite! I thought this up myself; any idiocies are my own! )
I don’t need evidence. The person postulating the positive *but implausible and unlikely assertion *requires the cites. We don’t expect anyone to attempt to post a cite proving a negative.
If you don’t support the implausible and unlikely assertion then you are adding nothing, there are no cites to give you. If you do support the implausible and unlikely assertion, then it’s up to you to support it with a legit cite.
Given that the Secret Service and other agencies spend millions of dollars and enormous effort each year to stopping the superdollar and the Bureau of Engraving and Printing has repeatedly redesigned the currency, I don’t think it’s correct to say that “we do little about it.”
I do not choose to debate the plausibility of the farfetched-seeming hypothesis (beyond asking Dewey Finn whether he thinks the CIA and Treasury Departments fully coordinate their activities).
What I will do is ask DrDeth whether or not he agrees with the following statement:
When someone states "I don’t claim that … such a thing [happened], but it hardly seems implausible" then it is unreasonable, indeed silly, to ask that person for a cite that such a thing happened. (Recall that the questioned sentence specifically denies claiming that it did happen! :smack:)
This is a yes/no question. Will you please answer it, DrDeth ?
Some of the ex cathedra gibberish in these forums is starting to annoy. I will continue to ask DrDeth the above question, until he answers it.
)