It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

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

 

Revisiting Rumsfeld’s "Missing" Trillions

page: 1
14
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Revisiting Rumsfeld’s Missing Trillions.



September 10, 2001, one day before the world changed forever Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defence for the United States of America gave a speech at the pentagon he called “Bureaucracy to the battlefield”. This was a speech in which the still relatively new DoD Secretary outlined what he saw as the adversary closer to home. the Pentagon bureaucracy, as he put it himself during that speach.

But it was during this speech that we went on to make a claim that would have far reaching ramifications, a claim that would ignite the imagination and investigative flare of those sceptical of the truth behind the events of the following day. Because about half way through his speech Rumsfeld went on to say that:


According to some estimates, we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions


Which was at the also reported by CBS who gave this report which highlighted the “missing trillions” in 2002


It is very clear based on this that he was making a very clear statement that the pentagon was unable to track 2.3 trillion dollars worth of transactions. That is a staggering sum of money that Rumsfeld made very clear that the pentagon is unable to track. The next day, the very next day the pentagon was hit the attacks of 9/11 and some sceptical investigators began to wonder if it was possible that there was any link between the attacks and this “missing” $2.3 Trillion.

It is therefore the remit of this thread to examine and discuss this possibility that Rumsfeld’s “missing” $2.3Tn may have had a connection to the attacks the following day. Please note that this thread is not about the actual attack at the pentagon but rather the claim that the missing $2.3Tn was either a motive or in some way linked to the attacks the next day.

The Skeptics views.


In the views of many (but not all) who are highly sceptical of the official narrative of what happened on 9/11 they believe that the pentagon was attacked to cover up this missing $2.3Tn. They take a view that it was either stolen or siphoned off the official pentagon budget to provide the huge funding required to pull off some kind of false flag.

According to one truthers Website:


Such a disclosure normally might have sparked a huge scandal. However, the commencement of the attack on New York City and Washington in the morning would assure that the story remained buried.


This is one common theme, the idea that Rumsfeld makes the announcement and then uses the attacks to cover the whole thing up so it is never mentioned again.

Another common claim is that made by Jesse Ventura, he also claims that the attack on the pentagon was a deliberate ploy to cover up the “missing” $2.3Tn stating in his documentary (skip to 35.00 for $2.3Tn info) on the pentagon attack that most of the individuals killed in the pentagon attack were investigating this missing $2.3Tn and that the computers storing the data were destroyed in the attacks. He essentially argues that the reason for the attack was to provide what he called “the icing on the cake”, a “two for one”, and that the attack was a cover to kill and destroy all the evidence of the missing (or lost as he says) $2.3Tn.



This Link provides some additional information stating that:


Ventura cites, in an interview with a 9/11 commissioner, a possible motive for the Pentagon attack being included with the attacks on the World Trade Center. $2,300,000,000,000, yes 2.3 trillion US dollars had disappeared, cited only the day before in a televised statement by Secretary Rumsfeld, money “gone missing” from the Pentagon’s accounting. The area of the Pentagon hit by a missile or destroyed by explosives or both contained all records of this missing money.

And just if you guys are all interested this is what that “missing” $2.3Tn actually looks like



Essentially that summarises the views of many who are suspicious of this missing £2.3Tn, it represents a common issue of contention that is raised during debates about the events of that. They argue that the missing money was stolen in some way and Rumsfeld announced it the day before knowing (or had been unwittingly directed) that the next day the pentagon would be attacked and the story of the missing trillions forgotten. Furthermore by ensuring that they attacked the right part of the pentagon they could kill all witnesses to their theft and destroy all evidence. A perfect, yet complex robbery of tax payers money.

Or was it?

edit on 25-3-2014 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 01:45 PM
link   
The Truth.

And this is where the “truthers” views fall to bits, with the truth.

They claim for example that this was the first time that this had been accounted and then the attacks were used as a cover-up to bury the whole issue. First let’s address the most obvious flaw in the claim that is being made that Rumsfeld announced the missing for $2.3Tn the day before the attacks so that it would be forgotten about. Quite simply if they were really going to cover up stealing $2.3Tn why would they bother to announce it the day before the attacks, the very fact that it has been widely publicised just goes to demonstrate just how flawed t his belief is. The very fact that I am able to create a thread about the missing money debunks this very claim. If they really wanted to cover up the story they would never had allowed him to make that announcement.

Which I may add was not the first time that this money had been announced as being “missing” or as it should really be described “unaccounted for”. A Pentagon fiscal report in 1999 was shown to have demonstrated that there was $2.3Tn in accounting errors according to a report published in 2002 stating that:


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.


So this was known about in Pentagon circles long before Rumsfeld made his announcement, so that is the first big issue, this was know about in the Pentagon at least, long before Rumsfeld made his speech and as we shall see it was known about long after his speech as well. Additionally there was also a article published on the $2.3Tn back in February of 2000 by the AP. But for now let’s address another issue, What did Rumsfeld actually say.

Quite often truthers talk about the quote right at the very start of this thread; “we cannot track $2.3Tn in transactions” this is often morphed into the “missing” $2.3Tn. Yet lets look at what he really said only this time lets put it in context, that is the context of a speech about bureaucracy in the Pentagon. (I have highlighted the important parts)


The technology revolution has transformed organizations across the private sector, but not ours, not fully, not yet . We are, as they say, tangled in our anchor chain. Our financial systems are decades old . According to some estimates, we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions. cannot share information from floor to floor in this building because it's stored on dozens of technological systems that are inaccessible or incompatible.


Huh.... how about that.

So what Rumsfeld was actually saying, when you put all of this in context is that the money was not really “missing” but rather they were unable to track or account for $2.3Tn in transactions because of dated IT systems that were “decades old” and that were “inaccessible or incompatible”. In other words because of these dated IT systems the could not track $2.3Tn worth of transactions which is exactly what Rumsfeld said “we cannot track $2.3Tn in transactions” because our IT systems are dated. Nothing about the money being missing or the money having been stolen but really it was all down to poor IT systems (There were almost 700 different systems). I cannot emphasise enough the importance of understanding this, it is not that the money was missing, but rather that they could not track it to acceptable accounting standards through the dated IT systems.

So now we know that contrary to what some of the conspiracy theorists might have to say, this story was not “announced” back in 2001, 9/11 did not cover it up and actually when you take the time to really look at what Rumsfeld was saying its not that $2.3Tn was missing rather that due to some pretty crap IT systems they could not track money through the layers of pentagon Bureaucracy. But what about that money anyway, just how much was $2.3Tn back in 2001?

For the fiscal year of 2001 the Pentagons entire budget was just under $300 Billion (or 0.3Tn), so even if we assume that all of the pentagon budget for 2001 went missing or was stolen we still have to find another $2Tn which means that you would have to add up the entire pentagon budget form about 1995/1996 to 2001 before you got to $2.3 Trillion. That means that if you are one of those people who had read this far into the thread and still think that they “stole” that $2.3Tn then you are saying that for half a decade all money that went into the pentagon was stolen. This is a utterly stupid believe to have at this point because by extension that would mean that for the later part of the ‘90s you are saying that no solider was paid, not tank was bought and no military operation undertaken. Essentially for you to still believe at this point in the thread that despite this evidence “they” still stole that $2.3Tn that for the later part of the 1990’s the US military was in effect non-existent and nobody managed to notice.

At this point any claim that this missing $2.3 Trillion was either stolen or missing should be considered “debunked”. That also by extension should also mean that any claim that it has anything to do with 9/11 is also debunked because as has been demonstrated it was simply a case that they money was not tracked to acceptable accounting standards not that it was “stolen” or “missing. As such there is no need for them to cover anything up by smashing a plane (or for arguments sake a missile) into the pentagon.

But even in the face of this, I know what you are still going to ask me.

So what happened to that $2.3Tn?

AHHH I KNEW YOU WOULD ASK!!!!

This question really just complicates what should by now be a very simple explanation because now I need to go explain to you what happened to that $2.3Tn that even the pentagon was struggling to track down. However yes, it is a very fair question, if it wasn’t stolen, and it wasn’t missing then where did it go. Well simply put it went to paying for the keeping the military running but what you are really asking about is was it ever tracked down to acceptable accounting standards.

The problem of pentagon accounting was and probably still is a very big issue, that $2.3Tn let’s face it, tax payers hard earned cash. The pentagon was effectively saying “we spent it, just didn’t keep very good books”. Which i think is not good enough for the hard working American tax payer (and I’am a Brit). What was also clear is that this was a problem that the Bush administration had inherited from previous administrations and wanted to sort it out. Which they actually did, they got Dov S. Zakheirm (part of the project for a new American centaury if you’re are interested in that) and a vast army of accountants to sort the mess out. In February of 2002 the DoD released this statement in which they said that:


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.


So they went from $2.3Tn to $700Bn in 6 months just by making a start on sorting it all out and that number was continuing to fall, how they done that I don’t know, therein lies the complexity of the question but the fact of the matter is that they did it.

This in itself also disproves Jesse Ventura’s claims that they also attacked the pentagon because the very people investigating the missing cash were all killed and the computers all destroyed. If he was right then they would never have been able to account for it, why would they bother doing that, then less than 6 months later have a team of accountants find and account for almost all the money.

Debunked

I know a few of you are probably going to have a go at me over using the “D” word but i think in this instance it most definitely applies. The claim made by some turthers (again i am not talking about all who are sceptical of the official story) is that this $2.3Tn was either lost or stolen and that the pentagon was hit on 9/11 to cover up this theft, destroy the evidence, kill the witnesses and have it never spoken of again.

The key is to understanding is firstly knowing the money was never really “missing” or “stolen” rather that it was not fully accounted for due to poor IT systems. This was an ongoing problem in the pentagon that was well known about before 9/11 and that was addressed even after the attacks of 9/11. This is not something that really requires rigorous investigation to explain, I have put this thread together in an afternoon. It does not even take that much evidence to disprove the idea that Rumsfeld’s speech was somehow connected to the events of the following day because the whole theory really falls to bits when you start to think about just how much money we are talking about and besides most of that money was accounted for 6 months later.

I think it is fair to say this has been debunked, but if you still think that somehow that $2.3Tn was somehow connected to 9/11 and has not been debunked then please do tell me why.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 



They claim for example that this was the first time that this had been accounted and then the attacks were used as a cover-up to bury the whole issue. First let’s address the most obvious flaw in the claim that is being made that Rumsfeld announced the missing for $2.3Tn the day before the attacks so that it would be forgotten about. Quite simply if they were really going to cover up stealing $2.3Tn why would they bother to announce it the day before the attacks, the very fact that it has been widely publicised just goes to demonstrate just how flawed t his belief is. The very fact that I am able to create a thread about the missing money debunks this very claim. If they really wanted to cover up the story they would never had allowed him to make that announcement.


HIDE IN PLAIN SIGHT!! They don't want you looking into this and that is the reason they let that speach happen!

You yourself believe that part of the story because of this alone.....Man o man they got you!!
edit on 3/25/2014 by Chrisfishenstein because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Chrisfishenstein
 





HIDE IN PLAIN SIGHT!! They don't want you looking into this and that is the reason they let that speach happen!


Any evidence "they" let the speech happen to "HIDE IN PLAIN SIGHT"




You yourself believe that part of the story because of this alone


No I believe "them" because i spent some time reading up on both sides of this theory and deduced that there is no way that $2.3Tn could possibly had anything to do with the the attacks of 9/11.




.....Man o man they got you!!


did they...?

who is "they" anyway?
edit on 25-3-2014 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:05 PM
link   
But that money is not missing, I am sure that there is someone out there who has part of it and they are spending it. Likely it is a dozen different people who benefited from this.

I'm sure everyone is covering their tracks to protect their misplacing of this money so the people who gained will not be caught. Having to protect that pension and keep the job till you retire can make a person cover up stuff.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:08 PM
link   

rickymouse
But that money is not missing, I am sure that there is someone out there who has part of it and they are spending it. Likely it is a dozen different people who benefited from this.

I'm sure everyone is covering their tracks to protect their misplacing of this money so the people who gained will not be caught. Having to protect that pension and keep the job till you retire can make a person cover up stuff.


Did you read all of the thread?

we know that most of it was accounted for as of February 2002 and that even then the number of unaccounted for funds was being reduced. We also know that they money was never "missing" rather that it was just very difficult to track it through the DoD's almost 700 different accounting systems.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


LOL, so they couldn't track it in the first place but give them some time to fudge the books and they will figure out what happened to it


Didn't you already make a thread about this??????????



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Sremmos80
 





Didn't you already make a thread about this??????????


Nope i dont think i did.

And do you have anything else to contribute?

Also if it was just a case of fudging the books a little, then they still would not need to go smash a plane (or again to avoid a argument a missile) into the side of the building.
edit on 25-3-2014 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:25 PM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


Ya you must not have read the part above the part you quoted......

Lets go ahead and take the word of the SAME PEOPLE that could not track the money that they figured out what happened to it and actually the total is much less...



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Sremmos80
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


Ya you must not have read the part above the part you quoted......

Lets go ahead and take the word of the SAME PEOPLE that could not track the money that they figured out what happened to it and actually the total is much less...


But can you then please tell me what you think happens with the $2.3Tn

and what evidence you have to back this up



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


Or was the Gold which backs the money taken hence why it all happened?
If the gold goes missing as in the video here on ats naming also those involved would make sense.
Germany wanted a return of theirs yet there's a thread on here regarding the reluctance.

Then there's the Malaysia and its twin tower connection.
They too have twin towers although this time the aircraft disappeared.

Do a wikipedia search for
The Three Sister's. or should I say the new ones.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by jazz10
 


So care to explain what any of that has to do with the "missing" $2.3Tn



Or was the Gold which backs the money taken hence why it all happened?


Unless we have started using the Gold Standard again I dont see how that is significant.
edit on 25-3-2014 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


They spent it and didn't keep track of it so we have no idea what happened to it or what it was spent on....
My proof is rumy him self saying that is exactly what happened....

And how does it go from not being able to account for 2.3 t to 700 billion? Did they not really spend that 1.6t???



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Sremmos80
 


Of course they did spend it, they spent it on running the military like i said in the OP, the problem was that with something like 700 different dated accounting IT systems that would not talk to each other trying to track down a individual receipt for example was very difficult, they were unable to "track" the money through the system.

The processes of uncovering that $2.3Tn has meant unraveling this ball of string and getting a team of accountants to comb through the books and find the logs for each of these $2.3Tn to see where exactly it went.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:53 PM
link   

OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by Sremmos80
 


Of course they did spend it, they spent it on running the military like i said in the OP, the problem was that with something like 700 different dated accounting IT systems that would not talk to each other trying to track down a individual receipt for example was very difficult, they were unable to "track" the money through the system.

The processes of uncovering that $2.3Tn has meant unraveling this ball of string and getting a team of accountants to comb through the books and find the logs for each of these $2.3Tn to see where exactly it went.


And of course lets put the same people that could not track the money in the first place to go ahead and try and find it...
I guess that is the part where we divide, you trust them to figure out what happened..
I trust them to lie to me.... again...



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:55 PM
link   
The problem isn't the 700 different systems, that's ridiculous. All money is budgeted and every department has their accounting that goes up the chain, how do you think they keep track of so many expenditures? The problem is when their giving foreign leaders suitcases full of cash!



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:56 PM
link   

OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by jazz10
 


So care to explain what any of that has to do with the "missing" $2.3Tn



Or was the Gold which backs the money taken hence why it all happened?


Unless we have started using the Gold Standard again I dont see how that is significant.
edit on 25-3-2014 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)

What if someone is privy to knowing the gold standard may return.
Gold bullion.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Sremmos80
 





And of course lets put the same people that could not track the money in the first place to go ahead and try and find it..


But that is not what happened, a new administration came to power, realized that something needed to be done about this problem and put in steps to fix it and streamline all of these systems and identify where this money went and that is what happened.




I guess that is the part where we divide, you trust them to figure out what happened..


But they did, you cannot prove that "they" stole the money or used it for something else.

its that simple really.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:58 PM
link   

jazz10

OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by jazz10
 


So care to explain what any of that has to do with the "missing" $2.3Tn



Or was the Gold which backs the money taken hence why it all happened?


Unless we have started using the Gold Standard again I dont see how that is significant.
edit on 25-3-2014 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)

What if someone is privy to knowing the gold standard may return.
Gold bullion.


This has nothing to do with the missing $2.3Tn you are grasping at straws right now.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


And you can't prove what really happened to the 2.3t


I know you are going to come back with the, Well they did the work and found the real number was only 700 billion, *roll eyes*

Keep believing that they were able to right this HUGE problem so quickly, that is exactly what our gov is known for doing....




top topics



 
14
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join