The Missing $2.3 Trillion

reply to post by kwakakev


your'e certainly right about one thing; we need to up our numbers if we're ever going to get these crooks and creeps out of power. it's not such a stretch to think that a dozen or so DoD people might conspire to "misplace" or "misspend" taxpayer money. obviously no one is watching that closely.

Did the plane not hit the computers and file storage rooms in the pentagon on 9/11? The same offices that could backtrack the data wwhich could explain where this 2,3 trilion dollars went to? The US citizens are such unfortunate people with such disaster happening to them for so many decades after an other. At leastthe US citizens should be grateful and optimistic for the future with such a fine and hardworking government on their side.

I do not know if any of you guys pay attention to what is happening in Europe.....Huge amounts of money is being drained from the countries. First there was this money switching trick...the national currency from many european countries into the Euro. There are the always rising oil prices (lowered with two cents and the next week raised by three), taxes, cutting in social services and not to forget the disappearance of money through the banking system..... and still there is this economical crisis. There is a lot of money disappearing....it is just like the chemtrails......everybody can see them because they are right in your face but nobody seem to know what is going on.........and worse.....many people denie it is happening.

If you would ask me there is enormes amounts of money drained from nations all over the world and used for.........you tell me..

reply to post by Alfie1


Here's one claim:

...Any remaining hope that the US military might still get its budgetary house in order were dashed at 9:38 am the next morning, when the west wing of the Pentagon exploded in flames and smoke, the target of a terrorist strike. Incredibly, the exact point of impact was the DoD's accounting offices on the first floor. The surgical destruction of its records and staff, nearly all of whom died in the attack, raises important questions about who benefited from 9/11. Given the Pentagon's vast size, the statistical odds against this being a coincidence prompted skeptics of the official story to read a dark design into the attack. As Deep Throat said: "Follow the money..."...

Read more: chomsky-must-read.blogspot.com...

Do you need more? You may find references to the specific damage done in the official report as well. Or is this the part in the script where you attack the speaker instead of the data?

Originally posted by Maxmars
Do you need more? You may find references to the specific damage done in the official report as well. Or is this the part in the script where you attack the speaker instead of the data?

I find it pretty dubious that a moderator on this site is claiming that there's some sort of 'script' involved.

Regardless, I don't think an opinion piece with no actual references I can see is any sort of strong evidence, especially as we know that barely a few months later that missing number had drastically reduced: www.defense.gov...

The problem here is that nobody seems to ever research what happened after 911, only what happened on the day and the ensuing few weeks.

reply to post by exponent


Looky... a friendly hand has arrived...

Billions of dollars of DoD taxpayer-provided money haven't disappeared, Zakheim said. "Missing" expenditures are often reconciled a bit later in the same way people balance their checkbooks every month. The bank closes out a month and sends its bank statement, he said. In the meanwhile, people write more checks, and so they have to reconcile their checkbook register and the statement.

DoD financial experts, Zakheim said, are making good progress reconciling the department's "lost" expenditures, trimming them from a prior estimated total of $2.3 trillion to $700 billion. And, he added, the amount continues to drop.

"We're getting it down and we are redesigning our systems so we'll go down from 600-odd systems to maybe 50," he explained

I should feel better because the greatest nation on earth has a department of defense that manages its money like my Mom and Pop on Quicken? That's why we pay millions of taxpayer dollars for the latest and most impressive of accounting systems and professionals?

I expect you maintain that the American Forces Press Service has set this matter to bed, right?

I did happen to notice though, that despite the reassurances about how this money is all being 'accounted for' by the heroic endeavors of the DoD accounting office (albeit slowly,) they didn't refute the impact of the jet which is said to have wiped out the accounting department and staff - one might think it would be easy to refute if it were false. Instead you ask for more (repeated) sources you will simply, per "all is well" tradition, continue to decry as unworthy.

And yes... I did use the word "script," ... it's the lasting impression of tired debunking rituals undertaken by one or more actors in an exchange... true or not, the appearance of this 'ritual' is as relevant as it is persistent. If you feel it is negative, change the script, it's fairly easy .... for example:

Rather than calling for evidence that says (for the umpteenth time) what offices were destroyed in the pentagon; offer some that says the accounting office wasn't hit.

The problem here is that nobody seems to ever research what happened after 911, only what happened on the day and the ensuing few weeks.

Oh they research it all right, on every conspiracy site available.

But they never ask themselves what these conspirators would do with 2.3 trillion.
You can’t deposit it in a bank.

You can’t live like a multi billionaire without explaining where it came from.

Do you think the DoD had boxes of hundreds laying around for them to stuff their pockets everyday?

Show one person that worked there, that now lives like a king.

Since the DoDs budget for 2000 was less than 400 billion, don’t you think more than one person would notice 30-40 billion missing? Remember 2.3 trillion equals 2300 billion. If you are stealing it over a period of say 5 years you would have to steal 460 billion each year or more than the entire military budget.

But like I always say: Never let the facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory.

reply to post by samkent


Too big to be true huh?

I think it is very possible that the money never existed at all. The negative balance was a construct of accounting and the purpose is not some Hollywoodesque 'get rich quick' scheme, but the ability to fund activities that those with access did not want overseen (or perhaps after already having done it, covering their tracks irrevocably). The fact that it ultimately has to be borrowed from the Fed and paid back by tax-payers (with interest) seems of little consequence to those who believe that "it's all been covered in the past."

In the end, there is still a mystery to be solved here. How does the most advanced military force in the world, in one of the most powerful nations on Earth manage to 'fail to account' for TRILLIONS of dollars? I mean, an amount that big would require quite an effort to 'conceal' don't you think?... hence the unreasonable notion that there may be a conspiracy at work here.

Originally posted by Maxmars
reply to post by Alfie1

 

Here's one claim:

...Any remaining hope that the US military might still get its budgetary house in order were dashed at 9:38 am the next morning, when the west wing of the Pentagon exploded in flames and smoke, the target of a terrorist strike. Incredibly, the exact point of impact was the DoD's accounting offices on the first floor. The surgical destruction of its records and staff, nearly all of whom died in the attack, raises important questions about who benefited from 9/11. Given the Pentagon's vast size, the statistical odds against this being a coincidence prompted skeptics of the official story to read a dark design into the attack. As Deep Throat said: "Follow the money..."...

Read more: chomsky-must-read.blogspot.com...

Do you need more? You may find references to the specific damage done in the official report as well. Or is this the part in the script where you attack the speaker instead of the data?

According to this report by the Inspector General of the DoD. "The Army did not publish stand-alone financial statements for FY 2001 due to the loss of financial mamnagement personnel during the Sept 11 terrorist attack"

Please scroll down to " Executive Summary para 1 " :-

www.dodig.mil...

"However, Army financial statement information was included in the DoD FY 2001 Agency-Wide Financial statement ."

In other words, the impact of the 9/11 attack on Pentagon accounting was a minor one on Army budgets for fiscal year 2001 and absolutely nothing to do with beavering away at missing trillions. That is a totally made-up truther fable.

This very recent video shows Donald Rumsfeld being asked about the missing money, and his explanation, others have not been so lucky.

www.youtube.com...

Regardless of how conspiratorial people think Rumsfeld and Co were over Iraq and they most certainly were, the question of the missing Pentagon money was brought up by Rumsfeld himself. The only issue then, is how he dealt with the problem. The other thing is that Rumsfeld after 9/11 was pretty much ostracised by the rest of the Bush camp, that could be a story in itself.

Originally posted by Maxmars
I should feel better because the greatest nation on earth has a department of defense that manages its money like my Mom and Pop on Quicken? That's why we pay millions of taxpayer dollars for the latest and most impressive of accounting systems and professionals?

No, that's what existed before the latest accounting system. That's why there was so much unaccounted for.

I expect you maintain that the American Forces Press Service has set this matter to bed, right?

Unless you have any other evidence, sure? There's no evidence of $2.3 trillion missing, and we can expect that in the last 8 years that $700 billion has been drastically reduced. Do you really think the US Government is happy to just throw away money they could be sending to no bid contractors?

And yes... I did use the word "script," ... it's the lasting impression of tired debunking rituals undertaken by one or more actors in an exchange... true or not, the appearance of this 'ritual' is as relevant as it is persistent. If you feel it is negative, change the script, it's fairly easy .... for example:

Rather than calling for evidence that says (for the umpteenth time) what offices were destroyed in the pentagon; offer some that says the accounting office wasn't hit.

The problem is that this is bad reasoning. Even if the accounting office was hit directly and all personnel killed, that is not evidence that somehow $2.3 trillion has been stolen, especially when work has continued on reducing that number.

What I am trying to show you is that even if it was hit, it's not evidence of what you are trying to show.

reply to post by Alfie1


Thank you. That wasn't so hard was it?

Of course, I never said they were beavering away the money; in fact, twice now, I have stated that I believe the accounting inaccuracy may have been a fabrication in and of itself.

I expect that you feel I thought, or was attempting to attribute the $2.3 Trillion mystery as the "Pentagon's Baby". I am not, nor have I even stated that the attack was part of the mystery. But I am saying (now) that, in any light, 2.3 Trillion dollars is not something any amount of self-auditing assurances outside of transparent accounting can remedy.

The tragedy of the accounting folks in the Pentagon was just another 9/11 miracle, like the Enron/WorldComm evidence etc. It's just another among a litany of things which 'just are.'

I was somewhat thunderstruck at the document you linked (thank you by the way.)

Results. Since 1991, DFAS IN-SF has made large, unsupported adjustments to correct discrepancies between status of appropriations data and general ledger data as part of its compilation of Army General Fund financial statements. These adjustments, known as ending balance adjustments, have ranged from $127.8 billion to $511.8 billion annually for FYs 1996 through 2000. The use of large unsupported adjustments in preparing
Army financial data adversely affected the reliability of the DoD FY 2001 AgencyWide Financial Statements and will affect both Army and DoD Agency-Wide financial statements in the future.

This is a demonstration of the mystery in place. It is not conducive to trust and faith to simply state that any discrepancy of this magnitude and the loss of the staff investigating it and materials collected to that point have no linkage simply because those responsible say... "No."

Originally posted by samkent
You obviously don’t do any research. It’s no wonder you believe in conspiracies.

There was an audit where the military couldn’t account for 2.3 trillion in spending. The money was spent just not accounted for. I don’t know over what period of time the audit was for. But clearly it was for more than 1 year.


This is such old news.

The "unaccounted for" issue is old news. It was old new on 9/12 as far as people like you are concerned. However, it was never addressed after 9/10. Never. So you're okay with this amount of money being accounted for? Are you made of money? Do you enjoy giving away your money so it can be managed like somebody's piggy bank?

My post was to point out that everybody put it on the back burner after 9/11 and left it there. If that's good enough for you, then you live in a different world than I.

Originally posted by exponent

No, that's what existed before the latest accounting system. That's why there was so much unaccounted for.

I contend that it is not possible to fail to account for any amount of money in the trillion dollar range. It is a supposition, and not an accusation. The sheer magnitude of the 'error' begs disbelief. Therein lies the seed of the conspiracy theory that something is not right about the timing of Rumsfeld's announcement of the discovery, and the destruction, coincidental or otherwise, of the very unit that was working to isolate the events surrounding the practices in question.

I expect you maintain that the American Forces Press Service has set this matter to bed, right?

Unless you have any other evidence, sure? There's no evidence of $2.3 trillion missing, and we can expect that in the last 8 years that $700 billion has been drastically reduced. Do you really think the US Government is happy to just throw away money they could be sending to no bid contractors?

I don't think it is wise to accept at face value the reporting of an agency subordinate to the potentially complicit actor in this scenario. And as for evidence.... well the entire point was the lackadaisical shrugging off of what evidence already existed before the attack.

Having said that, you are correct; it is not a question of the single element of the astronomical amount of alleged unaccounted spending that creates the suspicion; it is the coincidental eradication of unknown evidence and witness testimony that took place the next day.

And yes... I did use the word "script," ... it's the lasting impression of tired debunking rituals undertaken by one or more actors in an exchange... true or not, the appearance of this 'ritual' is as relevant as it is persistent. If you feel it is negative, change the script, it's fairly easy .... for example:

Rather than calling for evidence that says (for the umpteenth time) what offices were destroyed in the pentagon; offer some that says the accounting office wasn't hit.

The problem is that this is bad reasoning. Even if the accounting office was hit directly and all personnel killed, that is not evidence that somehow $2.3 trillion has been stolen, especially when work has continued on reducing that number.

What I am trying to show you is that even if it was hit, it's not evidence of what you are trying to show.

---------------------------
Perhaps you and I are not an agreement of what i am trying to show.

1) A massive-scale failure of accounting of public funds took place. This "failure" exceeded in magnitude, the GDP of most nations on Earth. This is not a simple matter 'sloppy' accounting; it is a matter of criminal ineptitude at best.

2) Coincidentally, the very unit which had been charged with investigating and reporting on the 'failure' was utterly eliminated the day following public disclosure of the failure.

Those two points alone are the crux of my concern.

Originally posted by Maxmars
I contend that it is not possible to fail to account for any amount of money in the trillion dollar range. It is a supposition, and not an accusation. The sheer magnitude of the 'error' begs disbelief. Therein lies the seed of the conspiracy theory that something is not right about the timing of Rumsfeld's announcement of the discovery, and the destruction, coincidental or otherwise, of the very unit that was working to isolate the events surrounding the practices in question.

If 911 conspiracy theories have proven anything, it's that life is absolutely full of coincidences. They can be found in the most innocuous of scenarios, and assuming that coincidence = conspiracy is the leap that must be made here. It is clearly easily possible to have different accounting systems in different systems. One of my earliest jobs was integrating an old mainframe legacy system into more modern software, until that was completed, we were in the same situation in terms of being unable to track that money.

I don't think it is wise to accept at face value the reporting of an agency subordinate to the potentially complicit actor in this scenario. And as for evidence.... well the entire point was the lackadaisical shrugging off of what evidence already existed before the attack.

Wait, so you'll trust the US government when they say something you find suspicious, but not when they say something you don't agree with? Isn't that rather biased?

1) A massive-scale failure of accounting of public funds took place. This "failure" exceeded in magnitude, the GDP of most nations on Earth. This is not a simple matter 'sloppy' accounting; it is a matter of criminal ineptitude at best.

This is not what the evidence shows, it shows that accounting systems were not fully integrated, and that lots of effort has to be made to bring old accounts into a new system, ensuring consistency. I doubt you can assign any criminal blame for either scenario.

2) Coincidentally, the very unit which had been charged with investigating and reporting on the 'failure' was utterly eliminated the day following public disclosure of the failure.

Even if this were true (for which you've shown no significant evidence) it's clear that the investigation and reporting continued with only minor issues.

It seems to me you're trying to crowbar in a complaint about something which affects any company or agency which has existed since the early days of computerised accounting. I can't think of a single company I have ever worked for that didn't have these sorts of issues.

How about we start by finding the law that is supposed to be followed by the DOD accounting offices? -

Federal Financial Management Improvement Act of 1996. The Federal Financial Management Improvement Act of 1996, Public Law 104-208, September 30, 1996, requires each Federal agency to implement and maintain financial management systems that comply with Federal financial management system requirements (Federal system requirements), applicable Federal accounting standards, and the U.S. Government Standard General Ledger at the transaction level. Federal system requirements call for audit trails that identify document input, changes, approval, and deletions by originator. In addition, Federal system requirements specify that all transactions are handled consistently to ensure the validity of audit trails and transactions, regardless of their point of origin.

- Bolding mine)

Had they been abiding by Federal law there should have never been a question of the $2.3 Trillion as being "unaccounted for". Naturally, no one was even brought up on criminal charges for this. Unofficial doctrine seems to indicate whoever was responsible was most likely promoted for incompetency.

Supposedly, the financial information for the year 2001 was destroyed on 9/11. Ah, but everyone keeps backup files, right? I had read somewhere that the duplicate files were on floor 25 of WTC 7 in the DOD offices there. We all know what happened to building 7. By deduction the files were most likely there as no one has stated they were somewhere else. It's rather strange how Google search results for WTC 7 tenants comes up very, very few hits.
So if the backup financial statements were housed in WTC7 we are faced with the fact that the only 2 places where the DOD kept their files were both destroyed on 9/11. BOTH BUILDINGS?
C'mon! The odds against this happening by chance are too astronomical to even attempt to figure.
Yet people want to say "no conspiracy here folks"

Regardless of whether or not a conspiracy is involved I would still like some verifiable updated figures. That is OUR money, not theirs. And now the government says it's broke. Really? I wonder why? With incompetence like this it was an eventuality that we would be. Still the DOD takes more and more of our National budget each year. This is what anyone would consider to be out of control by any standards.

Americans never dreamed that we would be taken over by a military coup.
If government cannot or will not reduce spending to sane fiscal levels and refuses or covers up massive amounts of missing money all in the name of "National security" we no longer have government Of the people, for the people but one Of the military, for the military.

That, by any definition amounts to a military coup.

Good that someone brings the topic up.
I was interested in it quite some time, till i realized even the US-taxpayers don't care about, so why should I ?

Off topic, but same story:
folks interested in the missing trillions before 9/11 might be interested as well in this article:
Billions over Baghdad:

www.vanityfair.com... s/2007/10/iraq_billions200710?printable=true¤tPage=all

Now back to discussion, without me, i might add

reply to post by Asktheanimals


Supposedly, the financial information for the year 2001 was destroyed on 9/11. Ah, but everyone keeps backup files, right? I had read somewhere that the duplicate files were on floor 25 of WTC 7 in the DOD offices there. We all know what happened to building 7.

Supposedly? "I read somewhere"? Do you really believe that ALL the financial records for the DoD for 2001 were contained in one section of the Pentagon and the 25th floor of WTC 7?

By the way, just for gigles, Google "Defense Finance and Accounting Services" and address. I think you'll be suprised. These are the folks that pay the bills and keep those records.

Originally posted by samkent
here

In fiscal 1999, a defense audit found that about $2.3 trillion of balances, transactions and adjustments were inadequately documented. These "unsupported" transactions do not mean the department ultimately cannot account for them, she advised, but that tracking down needed documents would take a long time. Auditors, she said, might have to go to different computer systems, to different locations or access different databases to get information.

Why do we have to keep repeating this info? So people want soooo badly to have a conspiracy that they just refuse to look for the truth. It took about 5 seconds to Google the answer. It takes you longer to whine about 911 than it does to find the truth.

It's a shame that one can believe, with certainty, that said information, obtained from google within a few seconds is fact..

reply to post by General.Lee


I did a thread on this a while back, with a video...

Previous Thread...........




I mostly got slammed by GenRadek, of whom I'm very surprised has not dropped by yet...

reply to post by hooper


Then would you be so kind as to link me to a source showing where that money has been accounted for?