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.

 

Go Inside the $56 Billion ‘Black’ Budget

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 07:22 AM
link   
I ran across this article this morning and figured I would share simply because of the bolded text below...


The Pentagon dropped its $533 billion budget this week. Some line items get a thorough public debate — like stealth jet engines and soldier health care. Others have opaque names like “RETRACT MAPLE,” and are totally hush-hush. Welcome to the Defense Department’s classified, or black, budget. It appears to be about $56 billion, the same as last year, less some inflation.

This may only be the tip of an iceberg of secret funds (more about that in a sec). But we’d like your assistance in mapping out that icy tip. So, with help from the Center for New American Security’s Travis Sharp, we’ve put together this spreadsheet. Feel free to add, subtract and edit it — kind of like a classified cash Wiki.


I know many of us here are interested in this sort of thing. With such an insane amount of money being allocated by our government for "black ops" it makes one curious. Someone has put together this spreadsheet trying to figure out which projects this money is funding.

spreadsheets.google.com...

Here you can add anything you have, or correct something else.

As the article states in their words "Like A Classified Cash Wiki".


It’s in research and development budget where you can find the bureaucratic poetry of black project code names at its most obscure. The services slap together the most random of nouns to make their code names. The Army’s fond of prefixing its black projects with “TRACTOR” (“TRACTOR JUTE,” “TRACTOR EGGS,” etc) and the Navy has a slight tendency for animal imagery with “COBRA JUDY” and “Pilot Fish.”

But don’t think that this is necessarily all of the Pentagon’s secret cash.


Did anyone actually think that? Really?
And who gets paid a ridiculous amount of money to come up with "Tractor Eggs"?


I thought a few might be curious or may even want to help with the spreadsheet, and I couldn't find it posted yet.

You can read more here...
www.wired.com...
edit on 2/21/2011 by Kangaruex4Ewe because: (no reason given)

edit on 2/21/2011 by Kangaruex4Ewe because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 09:50 AM
link   
$56 Billion!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

Why on Earth are people focused on attacking organized labor when we have a Black Ops defense budget of 56 billion?
What do they need 56 billion dollars for, and why can't we know about it?
If they cut that budget in half, there would be a lot of things that would not need to be cut in other areas.
Call me naive, but 56 billion dollars is pretty dam ludicrous in the scope of things.
Why is the defense budget never allowed to be cut or tampered with?



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 10:24 AM
link   
Now add in most of the USAID money given to other countries and you begin to see the black budget. We give Egypts dictator over a billion dollars a year through USAID and the people revolted because they have nothing but the dictator has hundreds of millions in his personal banj accounts?



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kangaruex4Ewe
Did anyone actually think that? Really?
And who gets paid a ridiculous amount of money to come up with "Tractor Eggs"?


There is actually a book that's whole purpose of being is to help the military come up with code words for operations and such. It's like looking at a dictionary of thousands upon thousands of easily pronounceable words.

56 billion is the money allocated for the black budget that Congress and the public knows about. IMO it's likely much lower than the real number.



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by spinalremain
Why is the defense budget never allowed to be cut or tampered with?


Not enough oversight. You can't cut what you don't know about.



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Kangaruex4Ewe
 


Kangaruex4Ewe, very interesting article and there's a good pdf file below briefly covering horizontally compartmentalized 'Special Access Programmes' by NASA's Bernard Haisch - I downloaded the file but it's since been deleted, here's some of its content including articles from 'Jane’s International Defence Review'



Obviously no answer can be expected here, but a
brief summary will be given of the elaborate official
security structure that does exist for extremely
sensitive and highly secret programs which could in
principle
be made to accommodate a UFO-related
program of some sort having a very long time-scale
legacy



• In 1997 there were about 150 DoD approved Special Access Programs.

• Unacknowledged SAP is a core secret.

• Arrangements known as “carve-outs” remove black programs from defense
wide security and contract-oversight.

• Unacknowledged Waived SAPs can be completely hidden from outside civilian oversight



A more substantial limitation on oversight is that some unacknowledged SAPs are not reported
to the full committees. At the Secretary of Defense's discretion, the reporting requirements may
be waived. In this case, only eight individuals - the chair and ranking minority member of each
of the four defense committees, the House National Security Committee, the Senate Armed
Services Committee, and the defense subcommittees of the House and Senate Appropriations
committees - are notified of the decision. According to the 1997 Senate Commission,
this notification may be only oral. These "waived SAPs" are the blackest of black programs.
How many of the SAPs are unacknowledged, and how many are waived, is a question which
only a few people can answer: eight members of Congress, the members of SAPOC (including
The Deputy Secretary of Defense), and the Secretary of Defense.


(From Sweetman article in Jane’s International Defence Review




And





• A “deep black” SAP is frequently based in a compartmenalized area or facility of a
civilian government contractor (e.g. TRW, Lockheed Martin) because this actually
provides more control and flexibility than a government facility.

• The security fraction of the total budget for a “deep black” SAP can approach 50%

• Security may go beyond passive measures to active disinformation

• Programs may be so tightly compartmentalized that even a director (general,
admiral) may not be accessed to all programs within his area of responsibility


Intentional cover is supported by two mechanisms, inherent in the structure of unacknowledged SAPs,
that result in the dissemination of plausible but false data, or disinformation. Confronted with the
unauthorized use of a program name or a specific question, an 'accessed' individual may deny all
knowledge of a program - as he should, because its existence is a core secret, and a mere
"no comment" is tantamount to confirmation. The questioner - who may not be aware that an
Accessed individual must respond with a denial - will believe that denial and spread it further.
Also, people may honestly believe that there are no black programs in their area of responsibility.
For example, Gen. George Sylvester, commander of Aeronautical Systems Division in 1977, was
not 'accessed' into the ASD-managed Have Blue stealth program, even though he was nominally
responsible for all USAF aircraft programs. Had he been asked whether Have Blue existed, he
could have candidly and honestly denied it. Presented with a wall of denial, and with no way to tell
the difference between deliberate and fortuitous disinformation, most of the media has abandoned
any serious attempts to investigate classified programs.


(From Sweetman article in Jane’s International Defence Review)


References:

“In Search of the Pentagon’s Billion Dollar Hidden Budgets: How the US Keeps Its R&D Spending Under Wraps”,
Bill Sweetman, Janes International Defence Reporter, 5 Jan 2000

“Report of the Commission on Protecting and Reducing Government Secrecy: 1997”
Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Senate Document 105-2.



It's estimated here that the black budget for the US Department of Defense in 2009 was around $50 billion and if Bill Sweetman's articles in 'Jane’s International Defence Review' are to be believed then the security fraction of the total budget for these “deep black” SAPs can approach 50%.

There's also an interesting file below which states engaged activity in 'disinformation' and elaborate cover stories 'in order to protect the integrity of the program from individuals who do not have a need to know' - so perhaps we'll never realy get anywhere near the full story




Program Cover stories. (UNACKNOWLEDGED Proqram.). Cover
stories may be established for unacknowledged programs in order to
protect the integrity of the program from individuals who do not
have a need to know. Cover stories must be believable and cannot
reveal any information regarding the true nature of the contract.
Cover stories for Special Access Proqrams must have the approval of
the PSO prior to dissemination.


PDF File


Cheers.



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 02:58 PM
link   
reply to post by spinalremain
 


I couldn't agree more. And with all the code names and secretive "ops" it kind of makes one wonder if it wouldn't also be a convenient way to use the "ball and cup" trick with large amounts of money. Now you see it... now you don't.



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 03:06 PM
link   
reply to post by karl 12
 


Thanks for that.


I would love to be a fly on the wall when they discuss these things. I think they receive more money than they claim and knowing our government we probably can't even imagine what is being funded etc.

Very interesting file. Thanks again.



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 03:12 PM
link   
$56 Billion = $56,000 million

Your average lottery jackpot starts at $20 million and maybe goes up to 100 or $200 million, the black budget is $56,000 million.

And that's just the black budget. The 2011 defense budget is $708.2 BILLION = $708,200 million

LOOK at how much money that is. It's unreal.


edit on 21-2-2011 by harrytuttle because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 03:30 PM
link   
Thats hilarious. The US almost spends more on unaccountable programs than the UK spends on defence (including the nuclear deterrent).

In fact the whole EU only spends 4 times that amount in total on defence.

Normal defence programs are badly run. Imagine running such a budget in complete darkness, the inefficiency and corruption must be epic.



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 06:47 PM
link   
For those who are interested in seeing how out of control military spending is getting.
The numbers can be off by a few percent but this is to give you a general idea.
The US and world military expenditures from the year 2000 to 2009 are:

USA: 380 Billion - Rest of the world: 670 Billion (2000)
- -
USA: 380 Billion - Rest of the world: 700 Billion (2001)
+0%(increase) +5% (increase)

USA: 430 Billion - Rest of the world: 710 Billion (2002)
+13% (increase) +1% (increase)

USA: 490 Billion - Rest of the world: 790 Billion (2003)
+14% (increase) +11% (increase)

USA: 590 Billion - Rest of the world: 680 Billion (2004)
+20% (increase) -14% (decrease)

USA: 560 Billion - Rest of the world: 760 Billion (2005)
-5% (decrease) +12% (increase)

USA: 560 Billion - Rest of the world: 800 Billion (2006)
+0%(increase) +5% (increase)

USA: 600 Billion - Rest of the world: 830 Billion (2007)
+7% (increase) +4% (increase)

USA: 620 Billion - Rest of the world: 850 Billion (2008)
+3% (increase) +2% (increase)

USA: 660 Billion - Rest of the world: 900 Billion (2009)
+6% (increase) +6% (increase)

Source

Please understand that this is still not the full picture, billions and billions of taxpayer dollars are also poured into different programs through other channels like for example by usage of a front company.


IT--



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by edog11
 


That's disgusting to see those figures.

What's worse is that all those billions can't stop a man from hijacking a passanger airliner and flying it into the Pentagon.
Those billions are a dam waste. Just my 2c



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 07:22 PM
link   
reply to post by spinalremain
 


I completely agree with you man.
If we spent even a fraction of that money to actually better mankind instead of killing eachother I would be proud to be a human being instead of being ashamed, wondering why my race is so f*cked up.
Ending world hunger for example will only cost around 50 billion a year.
That's nothing compared to how much we spend on the military.
There is so much ugliness in the world that I honestly can't see the beauty anymore, it makes me sick.

Just my 2 cents



IT--



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by harrytuttle
 


I can't even really wrap my mind around that much money!
It's absurd by any measure.



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 07:39 PM
link   
reply to post by spinalremain
 


It is disgusting. Especially after you read stuff like this...

$19 Billion Later, Pentagon’s Best Bomb-Detector Is a Dog

www.wired.com...




Drones, metal detectors, chemical sniffers, and super spycams — forget ‘em. The leader of the Pentagon’s multibillion military task force to stop improvised bombs says there’s nothing in the U.S. arsenal for bomb detection more powerful than a dog’s nose.

Despite a slew of bomb-finding gagdets, the American military only locates about 50 percent of the improvised explosives planted in Afghanistan and Iraq. But that number jumps to 80 percent when U.S. and Afghan patrols take dogs along for a sniff-heavy walk. “Dogs are the best detectors,” Lieutenant General Michael Oates, the commander of the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization, told a conference yesterday, National Defense reports. That’s not the greatest admission for a well-funded organization — nearly $19 billion since 2004, according to a congressional committee — tasked with solving one of the military’s wickedest problems.


Like striking a match...



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 07:41 PM
link   
reply to post by edog11
 


I'm totally with you. I see the human race as the terminal illness of the Earth.

Those figures above, and the fact that the United States is a free enterprise whore is exactly why the rest of the world loathes it. The rest of the world sees the United States as one gigantic whore who meddles in everyone elses affairs.

Yet when you ask a typical American why the rest of the worlds dislikes the American Gov and most of the American people, they will reply with something along the lines of "Oh they're jealous of our lifestyle."
- this to me is pure sickness
-65 billion a year to ensure that the rest of the world hates you.
Great Job!
:




top topics



 
7

log in

join