Does Fort Know really have the gold the government says it does? Many say no and the government is stonewalling. If empty, how do you think this would affect bullion prices? What say you?
I think I saw it in the National Blah Blah Blah or some such magazine that it was empty so it must be true.
Here's a CoinTalk thread from not too long ago that discusses this possibility in length: http://www.cointalk.com/t193152/
Hmm.. if I had a large stock pile of gold, I'd probably not tell anyone about it either for the purpose of not being targeted for getting robbed.
Getting in to find out! even the President or Commander&Chief of United State America has to get permission and pass to get in the FT Knox Depository . If was under oath I would say Yes & No,but I am sure there Gold somewhere but FT Knox maybe just 1-5 places we keep our nation gold bullion.This is why there are 2-5 more areas are more secure than FT Knox KY???:devil: * FT Knox Gold Depository maybe Disinformation America is well known to tell.
Does Fort Know really have the gold the government says it does? Do you mean weight or dollar value? I believe the Ft has the dollar value of gold they used to but not the weight.
If the gold was there you'd think there would be no issue showing it. It would be a confidence booster for sure, but if it were to be shown the gold is not there it would be extremely detrimental. They only hold it for tradition anyway, so why bother proving it's there? Nobody else cares if you have your mom's Christmas cookie recipe handy or not. Can you feel my sarcasm? If anything is in there could very well be coated tungsten as there are supposedly thousands of 400 oz gold plated tungsten bars floating around. http://news.goldseek.com/GoldSeek/1258049769.php
I suppose if it was empty, the traders would drive the price up in anticipation of future US gold purchases to replace the lost gold. I don't know how long the attention span of the traders would be. I can't think of any reason why the gold would not be there, but even if a physical audit was performed, a financial audit would be needed to figure out who owns it. The least likely outcome seems to me to be one where it is empty.
Two points, yes there is issues with showing a secured facility. The FIRST rule of security is to not let them know where its at. That is long gone. The second rule is you NEVER show the facility and your security unless absolutely necessary. I think the bars are there, they cannot be tungsten since they are not pure gold, they are mainly melted down US coinage so a tungsten bar would not be the right SG. I simply believe its there, but the gov't knows there is nothing you can do to satisfy some conspiracy theorists. The dollar value of Ft Knox gold will not change our debt situation, so WHY would they risk having it being gone leaked to the press? Military guards are there, if it was gone someone would eventually talk. I would simply be more likely to believe the Loch Ness monster is alive, or Yeti is real, before I buy into the idea that Ft Knox is empty. Honestly, this entire discussion and the fact many PM buyers believe it kind of gives a black eye to PM investors in the public's view. No offense meant to anyone, just my opinion. Chris
I have no idea whether or not the gold is there or not, but I have been inside the control center. I wish I would have had a better understanding of the possibility at the time. In 2006 my unit did some training at Ft. Knox, and for some reason I was pooled to supervise a small detail of Joes. They cleaned out an empty room, painted a door, and took out garbage at the control center. I can't go into specifics, but the ones running everything were all civilian contractors. The offices of the contractors had on average 3 computers per desk, and they had graphical information on them. There was defiantly something going on. There is no way they could have that big of a front going on with no gold inside of the compound. My initial impression was that the control center actually had more to do with intelligence regarding OIF/EIF, but I'm not sure why. Someone told me those guys were getting paid $100 per hour. All in all I do believe the gold is there, amongst other things… Correction (NEC) Network Enterprise Center
I was a Army and DOD contractor at my last job, the government overspends on 3rd party contractors, it's a huge tax payer waste. The company I was working for, I found out they charged the government close to 3 times the amount (I won't tell you how much I was getting paid but at 3 times the amount, you'd definitely be in the top 1% and not with the rest of the 99%) I was getting paid, so $100 an hour is cheap labor for the government. 3 computers per desk with graphical information doesn't necessarily mean something is going on per se though. And yes, the government would spend money to make it look like something special is there. But I'm not conspiracy theorist for the most part, more of a skeptic. I'd have no doubts there's gold at Ft. Knox or somewhere stashed away.
Lol yeah, instead of us idiots trying to make it on E-6 or O-2 pay. My cousin is a WO-5 and I still make twice his pay. Chris
No offense taken, and I never asserted the gold wasn't there since I do not know. What I'm saying is that if it is there it should not be a big deal to audit it. They did it in the 50's, so there's no reason I can think of not to do it unless there is less gold there than expected. The security is easily attainable information online as well as in documentaries, so I don't think that's a viable concern. There aren't enough tungsten bars to fill the place so that wouldn't make or break their ability to make new coins. And there is something they can to do satisfy the conspiracy theorists which is to perform an audit of something that Congress has full authority to call upon. The reason for identifying the amount of gold there is because the people who the gold belongs to have a right to know. Why would they have guards if there's no gold, because in that case they'd need to maintain the illusion of having the gold otherwise the owners would freak out. I don't understand why this is not obvious. Comparing it to monsters that have no actual proof of existence seems out of context to me. That requiress putting faith in something without proof, as opposed to questioning the validity of something that is lacking proof.
I don't know if it's empty or not, but if you should ever drive by and happen to see a "Rooms for Rent" sign out front, you know we're in big trouble. Chris