Hmmm...a backdoor way to put Bush and Cheney in the calaboose? And who tipped off the Italians and to what purpose?
VERY interesting.
Bush wouldn’t have anything to do with it. I seriously doubt that these Japanese couriers would have been running around with something like this for more than three months.
But it sounds like the Chicago Way: Bagmen secretly carrying large sums from one player to another.
I’ll pass this along to some friends and see what they have to say about it.
Bush and Cheney wouldn’t do this. They have access to personal, private money handlers that could provide nice services for them. I personally know one of the Bush family’s financial resources.
No, this is something else. The Government (FED) could have issued these for some purpose in violation of the Congress, but it would be a bi-partisan event. No party would do this without being able to lay out the blame equally.
SO, If they are real, and I believe they are, then the clandestine nature is odd. At any time they could have been deposited at the owners national bank and used for collateral.
This makes no sense. No one buys mature bearer bonds. The maturity date is not known. I assume they have matured so they are worth face value.
The only reason for someone to do this in a clandestine manner is for purposes of extreme secrecy and then you’re back to “ just deposit them in your national bank and use them for collateral”.
If they are fake, it’s already known.
130B is one heck of a lot of money to us, but nothing to a Nation State.
I don’t think NK would think they could pass off something like this. Printing millions of fake dollars is one thing. This is a really stupid caper no matter what the outcome. You don’t transfer that kind of asset without heavy security and DECLARING what you are doing.
The Coliseum just got a face lift!
This seems easy, someone in the Italian government, maybe involved in the G8 meeting, got wind of the back room deals that would be going on, and decided to get in on the finder's fee. Viva Italia.
I believe they are real, and I am equally interested in where they were going, where they came from, and why the government issued them.
(i) Japan could now be trying to reduce its $ holdings without offending the US, or (ii) someone high up in Japanese banking or politics might have purloined them in the past. The sums are huge, so I would have to go with the former explanation.
Why do I get the feeling that this has the possibility of destroying the USD?
Let’s say the U.S. wanted to pay another country’s government secretly for assistance in a strategic project against a third country’s government.
The Fed could issue to the CIA billions in bearer bonds to give to the cooperating government for the purpose.
Let’s say the Op didn’t go as well, or the recipient of the bonds turned out to be a bad guy, or we want to welsh on the deal. What to do?
Arrange to receive the bonds in Switzerland, but tip off the Italians about the couriers. Declare the bonds fakes, and wash your hands of the whole deal.
That scenario fits the facts I see.
If true, what country would’ve done enough services for the U.S. that we’d give them $130B in untraceable bonds?
When the story first came out, alot of people said they figured they were fakes.
But fakes would not only be worthless, it would probably be the equivalent of a felony to be in possession of them or try to cash them, so I have thought they were real.
And to try to cash this amount, this size of a transaction in bonds “under the radar” so to speak seems to spell to me serious trouble in the bond market and bad, bad news for the dollar.
bookmark
The IMF holds 103.4 million ounces (3,217 metric tons) of gold, making it the third largest official holder of gold. The gold is valued on its balance sheet at SDR 5.9 billion (about $9.2 billion) on the basis of historical cost. The market value of this gold was $95.2 billion as of February 20, 2008.
Hm, this incident is no longer as amusing as it was on Thursday.
I thought that was odd - kind of like when someone says, "you can trust me" (you can't)
I won't hurt you (they will hurt you).
When people are trustworthy they don't say it, it's assumed.
Same with those who don't hurt you - they don't have to say it. It's correctly assumed.
And the people who say "our trust in U.S. Treasuries is absolutely unshakable.” - They didn't say that five years ago - or last year. This year they say it ... why?