# This One's for The Obama Loyalists, Pay Attention. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 19, 2010, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784 "2010-08-19T20:08:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 51
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2010, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/1001 "2010-09-14T22:41:17Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > > This is dumb. I am not associating the desire to audit the gold with ANY conspiracy theory whatsoever. If your point is, in 1953 the gold was there, what dioes that prove? I want to open up ALL economic and financial entities to increased oversight and scrutiny. I would start with the Federal Reserve and continue on to Fort Knox. > > So who would you have perform this audit? The GAO, probably. There would be pressure to hide information, I am sure. But I think the effort should be made by all parties to expose the process to increasing public scrutiny to limit any shenanigans. Either of these efforts should be a regular audit, probably once a year, rather than a one time deal. If it is not completely thorough or honest, if at least SOME information gets out and we shed a bit more light on the workings of the Fed, the effort will be worth it. I believe the GAO is one of the more trustworthy federal agencies so we would start with them. Continued public pressure is what is required to get all the information out over time. ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2010, 10:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/1002 "2010-09-14T22:57:35Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > The GAO, probably. There would be pressure to hide information, I am sure. That’s a rather telling statement. There’d be no pressure to hide information if the audit matched expectations, only if it came up short. Sounds like you’re “sure” some of the gold is gone, and predisposed to not believe an audit that disagrees with you. Which is the classic thinking behind conspiracy theories. If there’s any information that agrees with you, it’s evidence of a conspiracy. If there’s anything that doesn’t agree with you, it’s because the Powers That Be are covering their tracks, and it’s also evidence of a conspiracy. ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2010, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/1003 "2010-09-14T23:00:22Z")
> [@42fish](#): > > > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > > If your point is, in 1953 the gold was there, what dioes that prove? > > Nothing really, although “The last time crackpots wanted Fort Knox audited, they came up with bupkiss, therefore they’ll find nothing now” is logically equivalent to your “The Gulf of Tonkin was a fraud to get the US into a war, therefore Pearl Harbor must have been, too.” I’m not saying that Pearl Harbor was a sham because the Gulf of Tonkin was. I was attempting to make the point that it is the rule, rather than the exception in the last 100 years for our government to lie or deceive the people into initiating or expanding wars overseas. The evidence to support the notion that Pearl Harbor was an expected reaction that served the purposes of the Roosevelt administration stands on its own merits. But many of you start throwing around insults to the effect that I am a complete nut and conspiracy theorist, suggesting that this notion is equal to belief in aliens at Roswell, the illuminati or any other far out there belief. This is hardly the case, and demonstrating that this type of disception is common in our history with countless other examples should dispel the notion that this is improbable. Whether you believe it or not, there are a number of different people who have coime to that conclusion. Read about it, think about it and come to your own conclusions. But don’t dismiss the idea out of hand. That would be irresponsible. I want to note that this is another unneccessary diversion in this thread. Whether or not FDR knew about Pearl Harbor has very little bearing on what is going on today. Governments lie all the time and a specific lie seventy years ago is not that important, except for historical curiosity. I have the feeling that many of you love these diversions because you struggle with the main concepts of reforming out bankrupt entitlement system (yes CUTTING social security and medicare), embracing Austrian School economic theories (replacing fraudulent Keynesian ones) and the wisdom of following the Constitution and having a very small Federal government and a larger role for local and State governments. Thats what I want to talk about. For some reason many of you don’t seem too interested in discussion these fundamental issues. Why don’t some of you go back and read my OP and respond to the ideas of the impoverishing effects of monetary inflation and its ability to enrich the bankers and corporate giants at the expense of everyone else. Why don’t you deal with the fundamental point which is that so many “progressive” initiatives are paid for through a fraudulent system of money and people are hurt by the monetary and economic system far more than they are helped through social programs. Maybe it is because the facts are on my side that you shy away from this debate, instead focussing on my personal views on vaccines and alternative medicine, or whether or not I believe that FDR (or his administration or other agency of government) knew about Pearl Harbor before it happened. Or a transperant and desperate attempt to smear me by looking through EVERY linke I ever posted and trying to hold me accountable for things I have no association with, calling me a racist or a bigot. If we want to continue this thread, lets refocus the effort and talk about real important issues once again. ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2010, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/1004 "2010-09-14T23:06:40Z")
> [@42fish](#): > > > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > > This is dumb. I am not associating the desire to audit the gold with ANY conspiracy theory whatsoever. > > > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > > You have this tone that implies believing such a thing is ludicrous. In fact to an educated mind, it is highly believable. > > So you think it’s “highly believable” that the CIA is stealing the gold from Fort Knox, but you aren’t pushing any conspiracy theory with you audit demands. Does that 'bout sum it up? :smack: Is it believable? Yes, it is. I don’t have any evidence to support this accusation, that is what an audit is for. By the way, I don’t know where Ron Paul said that he believes the CIA “stole” the gold. I’ve never seen that nor read anything to that effect. I’m the one who is saying “lets audit Fort Knox and find out”, then we can dispel all these rumours once and for all. YOU, on the other hand, are saying that any and all “conspiracy” theories about the gold are ludicrous, yet you WON’T support and audit. What is wrong with you? I am making no accusations. I am saying lets take a look and find out once and for all. ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2010, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/1005 "2010-09-14T23:14:49Z")
> [@Mozart1220](#): > > I always have to laught at the term “conspiricy theorist” like ANYONE who even suggests a conspiricy of any kind is a nutcase. > > Conspiricies happen all the time. > > This all started after the Kennedy assasination, to make sure that anyone suggesting something other that the governments official explaination would not be taken seriously. YES. Nicely put. I don’t entertain conspiracy theories as a hobby, nor am I even remotely paranoid as a person. Yet when my reading and the facts I gather contradict what our government is telling us about an event, I tend to believe my own eyes. Yes, conspiracies happen all the time. The CIA is involved with drug traffiking, for example. It is true and documented time and time again. History is replete with examples of government lies that are only exposed decades later, by which time the people have forgotten and are not nearly as outraged as they should be. People are intimidated into silence and going along with what they are told, in order to not be marginalized and smeared as a “kook”, a “nutcase” or a “tin foil hat wearing delusional”. In fact the pressure to not be “one of those people” (people who think for themselves) is so great that many won’t even look at evidence presented right in front of them because they **don’t want** to be convinced. I hope more start thinking for themselves. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2010, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/1006 "2010-09-14T23:18:32Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > I’m not saying that Pearl Harbor was a sham because the Gulf of Tonkin was. I was attempting to make the point that it is the rule, rather than the exception in the last 100 years for our government to lie or deceive the people into initiating or expanding wars overseas. The evidence to support the notion that Pearl Harbor was an expected reaction that served the purposes of the Roosevelt administration stands on its own merits. No it does not. You have failed to defend even the first discredited source you brought. And to discredit you even further, **even one of your links is actually** **a debunking and demolition** of the idea that Roosevelt knew. (I’m going to let you find out what link it was, just to see if you are indeed capable of identifying good and bad evidence.) > [@jrodefeld](#): > > But don’t dismiss the idea out of hand. That would be irresponsible. It would be irresponsible to continue to peddle not only discredit information, but also contradictory testimony as well. > [@jrodefeld](#): > > Maybe it is because the facts are on my side that you shy away from this debate Bwa Ha Ha! 😃 > [@jrodefeld](#): > > instead focussing on my personal views on vaccines and alternative medicine, or whether or not I believe that FDR (or his administration or other agency of government) knew about Pearl Harbor before it happened. Or a transperant and desperate attempt to smear me by looking through EVERY linke I ever posted and trying to hold me accountable for things I have no association with, calling me a racist or a bigot. I would arrive to the conclusion that you don’t have a clue based on your links. > [@jrodefeld](#): > > If we want to continue this thread, lets refocus the effort and talk about real important issues once again. No good sources so far, or I should say, since the thread has evidence of your inability to identify good sources, the “important” issues just can not be dealt with. Or rather, many conclude that we rather discuss the items that have more serious support and evidence with more capable people. ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2010, 11:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/1007 "2010-09-14T23:19:14Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > > The GAO, probably. There would be pressure to hide information, I am sure. > > That’s a rather telling statement. There’d be no pressure to hide information if the audit matched expectations, only if it came up short. Sounds like you’re “sure” some of the gold is gone, and predisposed to not believe an audit that disagrees with you. > > Which is the classic thinking behind conspiracy theories. If there’s any information that agrees with you, it’s evidence of a conspiracy. If there’s anything that doesn’t agree with you, it’s because the Powers That Be are covering their tracks, and it’s also evidence of a conspiracy. Not at all. I am just stating that we should make sure the audit is done correctly and with due transperancy. This is less true of the gold at Fort Knox and more in relation to the Federal Reserve. With the gold, basically it is there or it isn’t. The quantity and purity are the only determined factors. With the Fed they would make every effort to hide information and not reveal everything they have been doing. That is where the effort has to be. Do you disagree that the Fed and Fort Knox should be subject to oversight though an audit? I cannot understand why ANYONE could be opposed to such a thing. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2010, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/1008 "2010-09-14T23:29:09Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > I don’t have any evidence to support this accusation, that is what an audit is for. O. M. F. _G_. You actually think that GAO should conduct expensive(and ultimately harmful) audits of the Fort Knox gold every year _because_ you have no evidence to support your accusation?!? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2010, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/1009 "2010-09-14T23:37:22Z")
Oh well, he got banned… The only pity was that no one told him about his roasting going on in the pit. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2010, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/1010 "2010-09-14T23:37:50Z")
Hrm. That took longer than I expected. Is there anyone on the other side of this issue now? ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2010, 11:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/1011 "2010-09-14T23:40:27Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > > I don’t have any evidence to support this accusation, that is what an audit is for. > > O. > M. > F. > _G_. > > You actually think that GAO should conduct expensive(and ultimately harmful) audits of the Fort Knox gold every year _because_ you have no evidence to support your accusation?!? I don’t think it would hurt to audit the gold in Ft. Knox once evert 50 years or so. We might find the $10 that was missing last time. But what does ‘audit the Fed’ even mean? Lets focus on the unspecified nonsense, and leave the unlikely aside. I mean, if my Most Gracious Sire would entertain such a notion. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2010, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/1012 "2010-09-15T00:03:16Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > I don’t think it would hurt to audit the gold in Ft. Knox once evert 50 years or so. Being a military base, I’d be astonished if they don’t take inventory at least as often as the CO changes. “Oh, shit, the vaults are missing 20 million dollars of bullion? OK, everybody get together and figure out how we can explain this as ‘expended in battle’.” ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2010, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/1013 "2010-09-15T00:05:31Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > I don’t think it would hurt to audit the gold in Ft. Knox once evert 50 years or so. We might find the $10 that was missing last time. But what does ‘audit the Fed’ even mean? Lets focus on the unspecified nonsense, and leave the unlikely aside. I mean, if my Most Gracious Sire would entertain such a notion. If you attempt to audit that gold you will lose more than $10 in gold dust, unless you have some way to audit that pile without moving the bars. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2010, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/1014 "2010-09-15T00:09:33Z")
If anyone wishes to discuss the ramifications and logistics of auditing Fort Knox, they are welcome to open a new thread in whatever forum seems appropriate. Since this thread has been pretty much a one poster diatribe with multiple responses and that poster is no longer posting, I am closing this thread to put it out of my misery. [/Modding] [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784.md?page=50)