Canada can't account for $3.1B in anti-terror funding, AG finds

page: 1
11

log in

join

posted on May, 1 2013 @ 05:24 PM
link   
Canada can't account for $3.1B in anti-terror funding, AG finds



The federal government needs to do better at tracking and evaluating some of its program spending to ensure taxpayer dollars are being well-spent, Auditor General Michael Ferguson found in his spring report released today, and one of the most striking examples is that it can't account for $3.1 billion in anti-terrorism funding.

He found that departments reported spending $9.8 billion of the $12.9 billion allocated for security and anti-terrorism measures under the program but he couldn't determine where the other $3.1 billion went. The Treasury Board had no clear answers for him.


Steven's Government for all his rhetoric is not serious about counter-terrorism or accountability or transparency for that matter. I don't know of many ideological dictators who are fond of the latter two.




edit on 1-5-2013 by Phayte because: (no reason given)
edit on 1-5-2013 by Phayte because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 1 2013 @ 06:25 PM
link   
Only 3.1 Billion? Pshh! They aint got nuttin on the US!

www.google.com...:en-US
fficial&client=firefox-a&channel=f flb#client=firefox-a&hs=Wph&rls=org.mozilla:en-US%3Aofficial&channel=fflb&sclient=psy-ab&q=2.6+trillion+missing&oq=2.6+trillion+missing&gs_l=serp.3..0 i22i30.11560.17334.1.17570.20.11.0.9.9.2.787.4148.2-5j3j0j2j1.11.0...0.0...1c.1.11.psy-ab.kaNnvwSQ8zk&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.45921128,d.a Wc&fp=eb2f15e2a98a4631&biw=1024&bih=639




posted on May, 1 2013 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Tony Clement says although auditor general can’t find $3.1B allocated to anti-terrorism, no one saying money ‘misspent’

Furthermore, he found the government did not have a clear handle on whether it had met the strategy’s objectives of keeping terrorists out of Canada, and deterring attacks.

news.nationalpost.com...< br />
well, that exlains the "convienient" terror bust re Via rail the other day.

Clement just happens to be my MP

here's the thing
problem reaction solution

Now that Trudeau has been tapped they will leave the Conservative party so scandal ridden Trudeau won't even have to do anything to get elected except wait, which is just what he did re this info...nothing.

Harper will likely do the cyprus thing just before the next election as per his last budget
( when all the top economists have said throwing the bumbs out re Iceland is the right way to go )
the conservatives will wind up with less seats then they did after Mullroney baloney and free trade

...and the football will move incrementally down the field re the globalist agenda

and as far as Canada goes it will be FOOTBALL IN THE GROIN again
and again
and again


oh did yall see the vote scandal surfacing in the post along side this little tidbit?

news.nationalpost.com...
ed it on 1-5-2013 by Danbones because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 08:28 PM
link   
It's amazing. If a drawer comes up short at work, you have to pay the amount shorted. I believe they should have to pay back that 3 billion!!! Though thats just my wishfull thinking.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 09:08 PM
link   
LOL 3 Billion is pocket change for the US, they spend that out at a bar


ha I remember, when who was it Paul Martin was Prime Minister,had a brief case of undisclosed amount of cash disappear from his desk.. haha



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 10:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Phayte
 


In Canada aren't we traditionally around 10-15% of the amount of graft and theft through politics and political nepotism as the US? The US bank bailout was what about 800 billion, we were around 115 billion for our banks. The security related missing money out of the pentagon the day before 911 was I think 2.1 trillion announced by that slime-ball Rumsfeld and now we have "missing money" that shows up at 3.1 billion? I wonder if the AG missed a couple of zero's or if there is another scandal coming that's more like 300 billion out of the military, or maybe someone in the US is about to announce that the TSA has scarfed of 30 billion? LOL.

Cheers - Dave



posted on May, 2 2013 @ 12:03 AM
link   
reply to post by bobs_uruncle
 


I think someone would notice if $300 Billion when missing from the Canadian military coffers, given that the DND budget is approx. $20 Billion.



posted on May, 2 2013 @ 05:09 AM
link   
If they announce a task squad to find the money, make sure you're far away from them. remember what happened to the task force looking for the 3 trillion $$$ announced missing on... Sep 10 2001.



posted on May, 2 2013 @ 09:31 AM
link   
Money related issues are at the heart of most of the political problems in Canada (as everywhere else). They are very seldom dealt with in a way goes to the heart of the matter. The symbiotic relationship between political parties and corporate interests is the heart of the matter.

The classic "yin yang" symbol from far eastern philosophy could be taken as a symbol of the post industrial battle between democracy and fascism/corporatism.



This is the paradigm within which virtually all productive discussions of modern politics take place. "Follow the money" is a simplified rule of thumb, but it doesn't really convey the established and "built in" nature of political patronage.

Political patronage is as much a part of our system as the ballot box. It is the dark, shadowy, unacknowledged but fully equal partner/antagonist to the ballot box. Hence the yin yang symbol.

Political patronage is not going away.

The situation that Canada is in, is that political patronage occupies the position that the mafia did in the 1950s. It was a powerful force in society whose influence was either grossly underestimated or whose existence was denied entirely, as if it were an embarrassing relative.

Democracy is really on the ropes in North America. The forces arrayed against it, the forces of corporatism/fascism are formidable. Our neighbor to the south has been ravaged by these forces. We should not go down the same road.
edit on 2-5-2013 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 2 2013 @ 10:49 AM
link   
Hmm, it seems that wherever this "war on terror" campaign occurs, people get rich. It is those within and connected to the government and powerful people who are getting filthy rich from all of these wars and conflicts. The most money is always made during conflicts. And the sad part is that the people are the ones paying for not only the wars and "security" they don't really need, but corporations and other business entities are making billions of dollars from the government, who are paying these people with the money they get from the people.

And those in the government with the power to award contracts to these businesses are of course going to be corrupt. They will secretly take some of that money under the table by awarding contracts to friends and family members who are connected to that particular business in some manner, and eventually the money will work its way back to them. Take Bush in the US for instance. His connections within the oil business were spectacular. I can only imagine how much money he made for himself and his friends off of the war in Iraq, which he personally kicked off by selling a bill of goods to the citizens he was supposed to be leading. And he is not the only one. But if the president of a country like the US can get away with it, being in the spotlight that he was, then anyone else in the government can get away with it as well. And they do, every single day they are in office.



posted on May, 2 2013 @ 11:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Phayte
 


Ooops.

But Harper doesn't care if everyone knows he's a fascist thief. He has a back door.



posted on May, 2 2013 @ 03:30 PM
link   
S&F right off the bat, I read this news this morning and Harper's claim to fame was that it is just how the money is accounted for not to worry it is not missing.

So the PM is telling the Auditor General how the books work now.

My guess is that that money is long gone overseas to Israel Incorporated.

It is just amazing that they brush off that amount of money to accounting practices whilst they refuse to actually say where the hell it is.


Regards, Iwinder



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 09:44 AM
link   
They dont know where $3.1B went too but when it comes to me and my taxes whether or not I have paid enough they are all over that like white on rice(only a few thousand )



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by erwalker
reply to post by bobs_uruncle
 


I think someone would notice if $300 Billion when missing from the Canadian military coffers, given that the DND budget is approx. $20 Billion.


Wouldn't surprise me in the least considering the incompetence and rampant corruption in government. And any way, I've seen $150 million in tax and public funds frauds first hand, covered up by the government, universities and revenue canada ;-)

Cheers - Dave



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by bobs_uruncle

Originally posted by erwalker
reply to post by bobs_uruncle
 


I think someone would notice if $300 Billion when missing from the Canadian military coffers, given that the DND budget is approx. $20 Billion.


Wouldn't surprise me in the least considering the incompetence and rampant corruption in government. And any way, I've seen $150 million in tax and public funds frauds first hand, covered up by the government, universities and revenue canada ;-)

Cheers - Dave


There's a huge difference between $150 million and $300 billion. $300 billion is almost $50 billion more than all tax revenues for one year. It is 15 years worth of of the Canadian military budget. So yes, I think it would be noticed.

$150 million is to government spending ($276 billion in 2012) as $40 is to someone making $75,000/year.

That does not mean I think we should turn a blind eye to fraud. We should punish the perpetrators. But the government can misspend $150 million through simple incompetence or undue care vice fraud.



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 11:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by erwalker

Originally posted by bobs_uruncle

Originally posted by erwalker
reply to post by bobs_uruncle
 


I think someone would notice if $300 Billion when missing from the Canadian military coffers, given that the DND budget is approx. $20 Billion.


Wouldn't surprise me in the least considering the incompetence and rampant corruption in government. And any way, I've seen $150 million in tax and public funds frauds first hand, covered up by the government, universities and revenue canada ;-)

Cheers - Dave


There's a huge difference between $150 million and $300 billion. $300 billion is almost $50 billion more than all tax revenues for one year. It is 15 years worth of of the Canadian military budget. So yes, I think it would be noticed.

$150 million is to government spending ($276 billion in 2012) as $40 is to someone making $75,000/year.

That does not mean I think we should turn a blind eye to fraud. We should punish the perpetrators. But the government can misspend $150 million through simple incompetence or undue care vice fraud.


According to the US government's budget reports, the military budget for 2001 was $664.84 billion. The day before 911, that Sept 10, 2001, Donald Rumsfeld did a news conference at the Pentagon where he announced that $2.1 trillion dollars was "missing." I remember as I watched that news report at the time. So, hmmmm, more than 3 times the US military budget goes missing from the military/pentagon? Go figure?

I would say it is not improbable that some massive amount of currency could easily go missing from the Canadian government coffers and be blamed on the military. Blame is easier to give than receive, last time I checked anyway. Do you remember the HRSDC scandal? One billion dollars went poof. Ministers in the investigative meetings were actually joking around about the money, looking under chairs and desk, checking the bottoms of their shoes, looking in books and file folders. Our politicians are sick, disrespectful and flippant and I know this from direct experience. I could see see 300 billion going poof, it's a few simple keystrokes on a BOC computer transferring money to the BIS, blaming it on a government agency and then calling it a national security issue so it can't be investigated.

But, right under our noses the largest theft to date has actually consumed more than 50% of our gross national product for the last 100 years or so. That being the fraudulent inflation of currency through BIS/IMF usury via the manipulation of "their" politicians, because they sure as hell aren't ours.

Cheers - Dave
edit on 5/6.2013 by bobs_uruncle because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2013 @ 02:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by bobs_uruncle


According to the US government's budget reports, the military budget for 2001 was $664.84 billion. The day before 911, that Sept 10, 2001, Donald Rumsfeld did a news conference at the Pentagon where he announced that $2.1 trillion dollars was "missing." I remember as I watched that news report at the time. So, hmmmm, more than 3 times the US military budget goes missing from the military/pentagon? Go figure?


The 2001 US military budget was $307.8 billion. $664.84 billion was the amount budgeted in 2011.

There is nothing terribly significant about Rumsfeld holding a press conference the day before 9/11 to disclose that the Pentagon couldn't account for $2.1 trillion. It had already been mentioned numerous times, including in the following:
- an AP article on 03 Mar 00;
- a Defense Audit Report on 18 Aug 00;
- Rumsfeld's nomination hearing by the Senate Armed Services Committee on 11 Jan 01;
- a PBS Online Newshour article on 12 Feb 01;
- a Rumsfeld media scrum on 3 Jun 01;
- a Lou Dobbs Moneyline interview of Rumsfeld on 28 Jun 01; and
- testimony before the House Budget and the House Appropriations Committees for the FY 2002 Defense Budget in July 01.

The money was missing in the sense that assets and expenditures hadn't been properly accounted for thanks to 674 computerized accounting, logistics, and personnel systems that were used by the DoD and which didn't talk to each other. By Feb 2002 the "missing" amount had been reduce to $700 billion and was continuing to drop.

There is a very big difference between not being able to account for moneys spent thanks to sloppy accounting procedure and outright theft. Not being able to account for funds does not mean it was stolen.
edit on 7/5/13 by erwalker because: corrected date



posted on May, 7 2013 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by erwalker

Originally posted by bobs_uruncle


According to the US government's budget reports, the military budget for 2001 was $664.84 billion. The day before 911, that Sept 10, 2001, Donald Rumsfeld did a news conference at the Pentagon where he announced that $2.1 trillion dollars was "missing." I remember as I watched that news report at the time. So, hmmmm, more than 3 times the US military budget goes missing from the military/pentagon? Go figure?


The 2001 US military budget was $307.8 billion. $664.84 billion was the amount budgeted in 2011.

There is nothing terribly significant about Rumsfeld holding a press conference the day before 9/11 to disclose that the Pentagon couldn't account for $2.1 trillion. It had already been mentioned numerous times, including in the following:
- an AP article on 03 Mar 00;
- a Defense Audit Report on 18 Aug 00;
- Rumsfeld's nomination hearing by the Senate Armed Services Committee on 11 Jan 01;
- a PBS Online Newshour article on 12 Feb 01;
- a Rumsfeld media scrum on 3 Jun 01;
- a Lou Dobbs Moneyline interview of Rumsfeld on 28 Jun 01; and
- testimony before the House Budget and the House Appropriations Committees for the FY 2002 Defense Budget in July 01.

The money was missing in the sense that assets and expenditures hadn't been properly accounted for thanks to 674 computerized accounting, logistics, and personnel systems that were used by the DoD and which didn't talk to each other. By Feb 2002 the "missing" amount had been reduce to $700 billion and was continuing to drop.

There is a very big difference between not being able to account for moneys spent thanks to sloppy accounting procedure and outright theft. Not being able to account for funds does not mean it was stolen.
edit on 7/5/13 by erwalker because: corrected date


My error, I read the Wiki wrong and your $308 billion on budget is a lot closer, as quoted the $664 billion "2011 military budget is more than double the 2001 budget."

However concerning Canada, due to the rampant "nepotism" and selling off of contracts that has been occurring/has occurred within the government, it would not surprise me in the least to see $300 billion go "missing" via accounting error or other lame excuse. That may be 300 times the HRSDC missing-money-scandal, but that was a few years ago and the BOC continues to force inflation of our currency while arbitrarily devaluing it on the open market at the same time (the CDN dollar should be around $1.60us right now and rising). Of course it isn't like this is an uncommon practice, since JP Morgan is holding silver low when it should actually be at the traditional level of 1/14th the price of gold.

Nothing is what it seems, it seems.

Cheers - Dave



posted on May, 8 2013 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by bobs_uruncle

However concerning Canada, due to the rampant "nepotism" and selling off of contracts that has been occurring/has occurred within the government, it would not surprise me in the least to see $300 billion go "missing" via accounting error or other lame excuse. That may be 300 times the HRSDC missing-money-scandal, but that was a few years ago and ...

While it might not surprise you if they were, as it currently stands the government is not "missing" $300 billion. Nor would it be possible for that sum of money to go "missing" in a single year, given that current yearly revenues are some $40 billion less than that.


...the BOC continues to force inflation of our currency while arbitrarily devaluing it on the open market at the same time (the CDN dollar should be around $1.60us right now and rising).

I'm not even sure what you are trying to say here. If by "forcing inflation" you mean keeping interest rates low to increase the rate of inflation, that effectively devalues our currency. Yet you then say "while arbitrarily devaluing it on the open market" as though they are trying to do opposing actions.
Unless you have something to back up your claim that our dollar should be worth $1.60 US, it is merely an opinion. While that valuation would not bother me in the slightest as a consumer given I am retired and receiving a nice pension, such an exchange rate would be terrible for our exports and and anyone who makes their living working in that sector, which is most of our economy.





new topics
top topics
 
11

log in

join