posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 06:20 AM
Originally posted by JibbyJedi
Originally posted by Alfie1
This video is basically just an extended argument from incredulity leavened with some alleged facts which are just plain untrue.
List them with linked references supporting your (or their) arguments, and we'll gladly point you towards factual evidence.
This video basically says the official story "out loud", if that aggravates you, then complain to OS folks not the people saying it aloud.
OK, at 0.57 et seq the speaker refers to jet hitting the Pentagon exactly where budget analysts were trying to track down $2.3 trillion which Rumsfeld
had announced missing the day before. This is part manipulation by omission and part flat lie.
It is plainly misleading , and must have been intended to be so, to only refer to Rumsfeld's speech of 9/10 with the implication that this money has
suddenly "gone missing". Fact is that this sum of money represented about 8 years total defence budget, had been referred to by Rumsfeld before and
the figure had been bandied about before Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld ever took office. It was an historic problem which Rumsfeld attributed to antiquated
accounting systems in the DoD and he didn't mind talking about it because it hadn't happened on his watch. Nobody was suggesting this money had been
stolen but that it could not properly be reconciled.
Now as to the plane hitting just that part of the Pentagon in which budget analysts were beavering away at finding the $2.3 trillion this is a flat
lie. Most of the victims in the Pentagon were in fact in the Navy Operations Center. Some, in Resource Services, were Army financial personnel but
they were engaged on Army financial statements for fiscal year 2001 . This is a report from the Inspector General of the DoD in March 2002. If you
scroll down to the first para under " Executive Summary" you will see this :-
" The Army did not publish stand-alone financial statements for FY 2001 due to the loss of financial management personnel sustained during the
September 11 terrorist attack. Therefore, we did not audit Army financial information for FY 2001 financial statements. However, Army financial
statement information was included in the DoD FY 2001 Agency-Wide Financial Statements."
So, in other words, the impact of the attack was on Army stand-alone statements for FY 2001 but that information was included anyway in the
Agency-Wide Financial Statements.
There is not a shred of evidence that any casualties in the Pentagon were working on tracking $2.3 trillion and the idea does not even accord with
basic common sense. Does it really seem credible that all evidence relating to years of DoD expenditure would be contained in one small part of the
Pentagon with no back-up or duplication anywhere ?
I look forward to your evidence justifying the OP's video's take on the matter.