|
#
First, let’s start with the fact that these numbers are in billions where most of us are dealing with rounding up to millions or even hundreds of millions as being our largest common rounding. But these numbers are in billions: one billion equals 1,000 times $1,000,000, so the mental shortcuts/habits cause distortion at once, and this habit of rounding to millions drives most readers’ interpretations and views and distorts what has gone on here.
Second, while we are given data, it is not necessarily useful information, e.g. were there any groups numbers or subsets of group numbers that could be linked together because of the ultimate beneficiary, where the stated/listed name is not the ultimate beneficiary (remember again we are dealing in billions not millions, so subsets could easily be hundreds of millions). The same ultimate beneficiary could be buried in 3-4 different banks (e.g. $300-400 million in each of three would yield $1 billion to someone who is “hidden” behind the list or who is listed but who really has a “cut” in the allocations of others on the list).
By the way I do have information that is not stated here which proves this is true, but better I not state it right now but instead later after my statements are denied by AIG and/or the listed beneficiaries: then I will call them out for their lies.
Third, AIG has not therefore provided us with accuracy and completeness but with “transparency” meaning enough data to keep the public at bay and semi-informed but not enough to provide “useful, accurate and complete information in context with suitable and honest explainatory narrative… and to tell us really where the billions went and for what.
-snip-
— Posted by Hank
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
