Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold Price Monitor -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (50137)	3/7/2000 1:38:00 PM
From: long-gone	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116759

I agree(again?) we Americans are never really ready for war, but what I was talking about, althought our military budget is laarger than theirs, much is spent on just maintaining current status without any gains in munitions or weaponary. I reviewed the ammo purchases for the next 4 years, & the numbers over the 5 years ending in 99 were just plain scary!

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (50137)	3/7/2000 4:24:00 PM
From: long-gone	Respond to of 116759

So why do you figure this administration won't REALLY audit it Ron? Figure it's hard to audit air? An aide in one Congressional office I spoke with said the administration won't even answer questions concerning gold! 'Safe as Fort Knox' called into question By Jonathan Rosenthal March 05 2000 at 11:22PM The United States government's gold stockpile at Fort Knox was safely tucked away with all of the 147,3 million ounces in the cavernous vaults accounted for, the US treasury said recently. But a footnote to the treasury's report implied that no one had actually gone down to the vaults to check. The questions over whether the US gold stockpile was safe and sound began with a letter from James Turk, a prominent gold market commentator, to the treasury asking when the last proper audit of the gold stock in Fort Knox had been done. Turk said he believed the last audit had taken place under the Eisenhower administration in the 1950s. Giving the government the benefit of the doubt, Turk asked for a copy of the most recent audit report, which presumably was dated a little more recently than the Cuban missile crisis. The treasury did not bother to answer his letters. Finally Turk wrote to his congressman, John Sununu, and asked him to ask the treasury. In February the treasury replied to Sununu saying an audit had been done as recently as September 1998 and the gold was safely accounted for. But Turk read the fine print in the audit report. It emerged that although the audit was conducted by an outside party, Urbach Kahn & Werlin, the external auditors had relied on reports supplied by the treasury. It turns out that, in turn, the treasury relied on documentation and ledgers supplied by the US mint, which was responsible for looking after the gold in Fort Knox. Turk, in a follow-up letter to Sununu, said that according to the response from the treasury "a proper audit of the gold reserve at Fort Knox has not been undertaken". He defined a proper audit as one in which independent third parties did, among other things, a random assay of gold bars to determine if they really were gold bars. "In the absence of a proper audit the gold reserve at Fort Knox may be at risk," he wrote to Sununu, asking the congressman to pass further questions on to the treasury. These questions specifically asked when last had an independent accounting firm actually counted the gold bars in Fort Knox and when these bars were last randomly assayed.