It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

# Toronto G-20: A Tale Told by Village Idiots

page: 1
1
share:

posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 10:34 AM
When Stephen Harper took office he had a big set of clown shoes to fill, those of Brian "Clarabelle" Mulroney. Few who weren't completely hammered thought that the dweeb from Manitoba was sufficiently encrusted to fill those shoes. Well, drink up knuckleheads, after the G-20 summit, Central Scouting is starting to think this kid may just have the "wrong stuff".

Let me see . . . one billion dollars divided by twenty million dollars (Cost of the Pittsburg summit, plus reasonable increment) . Bear with me, math is not my strong point, but then again, neither is it the strong point of our elected representatives.

That would be analogous to one billion divided by twenty million and crossing off seven zeros would be . . . is a billion a thousand million, or is that an imperial billion? Stand by. I'll have to consult reference books.

OK. In America a billion is one thousand million. (1,000,000,000)

In the UK, which as everyone knows, is a thousand times bigger, better, and more powerful than America, a billion is one million million. (1,000,000,000,000,000)

Interestingly the British billion is equal to the American trillion. I won't go into what a googol is or what a googolplex is. You can read about them here:

mathforum.org...

I think it is fairly safe to assume that Canada spent an American billion dollars on the G-20 summit. Frankly, I don't think even Brian Mulroney would toss a British billion at an event like this.

So. One billion with seven zeros crossed off, (1,000,000,000) leaves one hundred (100). Divide that by twenty million with seven zeros crossed off (20,000,000). That would be one hundred divided by two, which is fifty (50).

That means that instead of securing these G-20 leaders at the rate (plus modest increment) that they were secured for in Pittsburg (\$18,000,000 + \$2,000,000 = \$20,000,000), here in Toronto fifty times as much money was spent to do the same job.

If anyone sent their kid to the store to buy a popsicle for a buck and the kid came back with the popsicle, but said it cost fifty dollars (\$50), they would sit the little fellow down for a chat and explain a couple of things to him, then they would go down to the store to get their money back and if they didn't get their money back, they would go to the police.

If the kid had a gang of friends that said "Oh no Mr. Taxpayer. That money was well spent, I think," you would think that you were being told a tale by a collection of village idiots.

That is exactly what the press has been in the aftermath of the G-20, a collection of village idiots, with their chorus of "That money was well spent!" . . . or is it worse?

Are they actually co-conspirators?

Pull up your socks, Toronto press. The Bryant debacle and now this! Whose team are you on?

[edit on 29-6-2010 by ipsedixit]

posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 10:43 AM
isnt the press owned by the same people attending the summit?????

soooooo why would they tell the public how their bosses just ripped the country off????? when the mass media brainwashing machine is lying to me im happy because thats the norm. you have to start to worry when they start telling you the truth.

posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 11:12 AM

Wit and subtlety are seldom seen in these forums? What ivy covered pile did you emerge from? Nevermind.

This G-20 story is Stevie Cameron (On the Take) territory. Since no-one else has asked the question yet, let me be the first. What (in detail) was the money spent on?

I can't get the truth from the press. I can't even get "Kentucky Journalism" from the press, so I've got to provide my own.

[edit on 29-6-2010 by ipsedixit]

new topics

1