Who Lost the 2.3 Trillion ?

reply to post by jrod

Rumsfeld also said on air that a missile hit the Pentagon.

Interesting....

Plenty of sources to back it up, not going to post a link.

Very convenient...

Of course if you provided a link we could discuss it.

I found this of Rumsfeld talking about the attack at the pentagon and the events of that day make of it what you will but he does say that at first he did not know what had hit the pentagon but that a air force coronal had told him it was a plane.



So to be clear i really am no fan of Rumsfeld

But i really would love it if you could please show us all your source with Rumsfeld admitting to a missile hitting the pentagon on air and it in its full context.

reply to post by Blowback

So why did would Rumsfeld bring up a day before 911..??? well it could of served as a way too divert the pentagon from the upcoming attack,,,The pentagon would have been busy focusing on accounting for the lost money

Nice story dude.

So you are now saying that the whole reason he admitted to it was so that he could distract the pentagon into looking for the money.

Really.....

Because this had been going on as you say for a long time, and its not like he had everyone looking down the back of couches for nickels and dimes (up to the value of $2.3T) soon as he came out with that to the media.

Sorry but your explanation does not pass my "logic" test.

Pretty sure the whole point of announcing the unaccounted for trillions had nothing to do with 911 other than never letting a good tragedy go to waste. Assuming the 911 conspiracy perpetrators (within the White House) were true, then the only point I'd see of them doing it would be for it to get lost in the 24hr news cycle knowing that what's about to come will make it irrelevant anyway. What I do consider curious is the announcement made by Rumsfeld was on a Tuesday. Why is that curious? Well I'd expect the government to drop a bombshell like that on a Friday when people aren't listening and by Monday Justin Beiber would have been caught with his pants down.

There is also the argument that the story was reported back in March the same year, which was true but that's not the same as a national tv news discussion. Had 911 not happened and Rumsfeld still made the announcement it surely would have made the rounds through all the talking heads ad naseam. Is this proof of anything? No, just curious.

Also curious, is the debate and discussion about how or why it was reported like it was but still to this day simply viewed as something expected by our government. Never held to account, but again the records were destroyed right?

The debunkers should stay away from this subject, imo. It makes you look really gullible when you will believe things like the Pentagon not being able to account for 2.3 trillion dollars, because of dodgy accounting. Really debunkers? Really? You know that at the time that amount of money was almost 10 years of the total defense budget. So some bad accounting lost track of almost ten years worth of their budget, sounds like it's not the truthers that have some explaining to do.

OtherSideOfTheCoin
Sorry but your explanation does not pass my "logic" test.

So you think none of the top brass at the Pentagon wouldn't have been dealing with 2.3 trillion that was reported missing the next day???

Ya know just because ya can spell "logic" ,,doesn't mean you know what it means

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


Can't find it right now. It was on youtube years ago. Google searches are censored so I'll have to really do some digging to locate it. If I remember correctly is was an interview Rumsfeld gave on 9/11 or 9/12 and he clearly stated a missile hit the Pentagon.

There are a lot of live news reports from 9/11 that are now nowhere to be found.

I'll find it and share it.

reply to post by samkent


It'll be behind the cushion's on the sofa in the Pentagon. Maybe the military are stashing it to pay off the national debt.

Not Rummy, but a Freudian slip maybe? About 5:50 into the video is when he mentions a missile hitting the Pentagon.

reply to post by jrod

It was a $2.3 trillion 'mistake.' My guess is the CIA and black-ops are responsible for the majority of it with a few palms being greased as well.

You do realize that the entire us budget didn't hit 2.3 trillion until 2006 didn't you?
They would have to skim 10% of the entire US budget back to 1976 to equal 2.3 trillion.
That's 25 years. And no one noticed????

Politicans of course!

Who else are better at pissing away money for little worth!

reply to post by crazyewok

Politicans of course!

Who else are better at pissing away money for little worth!

The question is NOT where did the go.

The question IS where did the money come from ?
Who's budget was it taken from ?
Which federal agency didn't get the full amount of money they were promised ?

reply to post by samkent


Think Office Space and that skim scam. Sure there would be people who notice, but that is where the palm grease comes into play. That works as long as only a few know and those who know are willing to look the other way so long as they get their palm's grease.

"Losing" at a rate of $1 million/minute, it would take 5 years to lose 2.3 Trillion

reply to post by jrod


You would have a better chance of seeing God than getting this sucker unraveled. The consequences would be greater than this nation can bare.

reply to post by Rosinitiate


When I was doing avionics work for the US Navy we would often wonder why some relatively simple components had an outrageous price tag. I can think of one small relay that was $1200 and a very small inductor that was around $600. The relay could not have been worth more than a couple of hundred and the inductor a couple of dollars. Then one day one of my co-workers said the prices of a lot of components are so inflated because a large portion of that money is used to fund black-ops and that is how they hide it.

It actually makes a lot of sense(and dollars). However it would be very difficult to actually prove this.

reply to post by jaws1975


It's about as believable as saying "I lost a mountain".
It was right here behind my house then I look out the window this morning and poof, it's gone.
I'm not going to argue the $2.3 trillion with anyone, the Pentagon needed several more years of dodgy accounting to provide a partial answer.


WHO LOST THE $2.3 TRILLION?
THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER.

reply to post by jrod


Richard Dolan, the UFO researcher/historian, has surmised that it costs 7-8 times as much for the security and secrecy of the black ops projects as for the projects themselves.

Think underground tunnels and bases, multiple levels of both security forces and secrecy clearances all requiring high pay grades, a 'breakaway civilization' doing godknowswhat with what they've uncovered so far, and last but hardly least, the reported thousands of dollars that are quietly given to ranchers who report mutilated cattle on their properties to keep quiet about it. Each cow is worth several thousand dollars.

reply to post by jrod

Then one day one of my co-workers said the prices of a lot of components are so inflated because a large portion of that money is used to fund black-ops and that is how they hide it.

It actually makes a lot of sense(and dollars). However it would be very difficult to actually prove this.

Sorry but that doesn't make sense either.
Yes we have heard of the $600 toilet seats and such.
The DoD can't overspend $2.3 trillion in 5 or 10 years without the world knowing it.
The entire DoD budget was just over $300 billion that year.

If your 7 year old son said some strange man stole $1000 from him your first question is going to be "Where did you get $1000 ?".

So I ask again Who lost $2.3 trillion ?

"Lost" is perhaps not an exact descriptive, stolen would be a more accurate adjective.

reply to post by HumAnnunaki


Interesting and informative video, in terms of scale. Thats an awful lot of paper! Since replying earlier to this thread (in which I mention the idea that 2.3 trillion in gold would be a logistical nightmare), a friend of mine helped me with some of the trickier elements of the mathematics behind working out how much space would be taken up by the amount in gold.

If we took my calculations from my previous response :

reply to post by TrueBrit


... and assuming any level of accuracy in that, what so ever, my buddy reckons you could fit that much gold into a 20 metre cube. So in actual fact, it might be easier to consolidate the cash into gold. I mean, at a value of well over $400,000 a bar, the gold would take up less space than the same value in paper or coin. It would, however, be heavy as all hell.