The War on Waste - killed by the War of on Terror.
Have you ever wondered why this issue of 2.3 trillion dollars of unaccounted-for money - was dropped and not pursued? Well I have that's a lot of money.
"How do we know we need $48 billion (more) since we don't know what we're spending and what we're buying?" & "With good financial oversight we could find $120 billion in loose change in that rat-infested building, without having to hit the taxpayers." Retired Vice Admiral Jack Shanahan
The War on Waste - killed by the War of on Terror.
Have you ever wondered why this issue of 2.3 trillion dollars of unaccounted-for money - was dropped and not pursued? Well I have that's a lot of money.
"How do we know we need $48 billion (more) since we don't know what we're spending and what we're buying?" & "With good financial oversight we could find $120 billion in loose change in that rat-infested building, without having to hit the taxpayers." Retired Vice Admiral Jack Shanahan
CBS News can't be trusted to report on the government's activities - they are part of the vast left-wing media conspiracy.
I was aware of the lack of accountability and oversight in regards to the Pentagon budget, but I had no idea it was to the tune of $2.3 trillion. I wonder if they include the billions of $$ air lifted into Iraq and Afghanistan?
I'm trying to find any GAO reports to see if they categorized mismanagement...
I was aware of the lack of accountability and oversight in regards to the Pentagon budget, but I had no idea it was to the tune of $2.3 trillion. I wonder if they include the billions of $$ air lifted into Iraq and Afghanistan?
This report was pre 9/11... so it does not have anything to do with any potential waste thereafter. And, that 2.3 trillion dollar estimate, that came directly out of the neocon/horse's mouth.
$2,300,000,000,000 / 300,000,000 +/- people = about $7600 +/- per person in the US.
Pursuant to the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990, as amended by the Federal Financial Management Act of 1994 (a title of the Government Management Reform Act of 1994), the Inspector General of each covered federal agency is required to audit and publish the financial statements of their agency.
In fiscal 1999, DOD reported $2.3 trillion of undocumentable adjustments to balance its books. In fiscal 2000, DOD reported $1.1 trillion of undocumentable adjustments to balance its books. For fiscal 2001, DOD declined to report the amount of undocumentable adjustments used to balance its books.
Apparently that figure - is just for the Fiscal Year of 1999.
Then another $1.1 trillion for FY 2000.
Then a decline (an F-U to the public) for FY 2001. After that - who knows?
Do these numbers make any fucking sense to anyone? How can (DOD books be cooked by) $2.3 trillion - in just one year? http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Feb2005 … budget.pdf How does a DOD budget of just under $500 billion balloon to trillions in cooked numbers?
Two big budget items represent the current cost of defense goods and services obtained in the past. The Department of Veterans Affairs, which is authorized to spend more than $72 billion in the current fiscal year, falls in this category. Likewise, a great deal of the government’s interest expense on publicly held debt represents the current cost of defense outlays financed in the past by borrowing from the public.
To estimate the size of the entire de facto defense budget, I gathered data for fiscal 2006, the most recently completed fiscal year, for which data on actual outlays are now available. In that year, the Department of Defense itself spent $499.4 billion. Defense-related parts of the Department of Energy budget added $16.6 billion. The Department of Homeland Security spent $69.1 billion. The Department of State and international assistance programs laid out $25.3 billion for activities arguably related to defense purposes either directly or indirectly. The Department of Veterans Affairs had outlays of $69.8 billion. The Department of the Treasury, which funds the lion’s share of military retirement costs through its support of the little-known Military Retirement Fund, added $38.5 billion. A large part of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s outlays ought to be regarded as defense-related, if only indirectly so. When all of these other parts of the budget are added to the budget for the Pentagon itself, they increase the fiscal 2006 total by nearly half again, to $728.2 billion.
To find out how much of the government’s net interest payments on publicly held national debt ought to be attributed to past debt-funded defense spending requires a considerable amount of calculation. I added up all past deficits (minus surpluses) since 1916 (when the debt was nearly zero), prorated according to each year’s ratio of narrowly defined national security spending—military, veterans, and international affairs—to total federal spending, expressing everything in dollars of constant purchasing power. This sum is equal to 91.2 percent of the value of the national debt held by the public at the end of 2006. Therefore, I attribute that same percentage of the government’s net interest outlays in that year to past debt-financed defense spending. The total amount so attributed comes to $206.7 billion.
Adding this interest component to the previous all-agency total, the grand total comes to $934.9 billion, which is more than 87 percent greater than the Pentagon’s outlays alone.
So the total DOD budget for FY 2006 was actually (approximately - at least) $934.9 billion. (Ok that explains a shell game and additional spending, but not cooking the books by one or two trillion dollars!.)
I would say - someone (another group of people) already made that kind of statement before.
The War on Waste - was killed by the War of on Terror... So lets move on to the killing day - Sept. 11, 2001.
Here in this video clip a BBC reporter is basically reading from a script; and reports that WTC 7 (the Solomon Brothers Bldg.) has collapsed about 20 minutes before it actually collapsed (it collapsed 22:20 British time, not 21:54 British Time per one time stamp). And, another on-scene BBC reporter has the building (WTC 7) standing behind her in the background (some weird shit no?).
A lot of important financial information (concerning on-going criminal investigations) was lost - when this building was demolished (... with explosives).
Just for fun - how the official-myth was sold on Sept 11, 2001, in the AM. In this video clip, an anonymous guy in a baseball cap spews the official story before there was an official story. And so does another (myth maker) to Dan Rather... Note these official elements in both stories (before there was an official story): 1.) Velocity of Planes. 2.) Intense heat. 3.) Structural Collapse.
Oh - there's even more! (Evidence of it being a scripted event #4). Giuliani said - I was told the 1st tower - would collapse.
I find it strange that there was a script of material circulating in the media - prior to events actually happening and prior to there actually being an official story.
Information about WTC7 (its tenants and information lost on Sept. 11, 2001).
A report ... released by the Treasury Department ... show[s] the true deficit in the Bush administration's 2006 federal budget to be an astounding $3.5 trillion in the red, not $248.2 billion as ... reported.
And the American people wonder why the world hates them.
No actually we could care less.
Unfortunately that kind of apathy is why others will always wish to do harm to the US. The number of civilian casualties also gives these sickos the right, in their mind, to respond in kind. Not taking your government to task over how it treats other nations only blank cards what they do.
Ask yourself, if your family had been bombed by an army of some nation would you attack that same army and likely die or would you go after the first person, even a civi, from that nation to cross your path? Please be honest.
And the American people wonder why the world hates them.
No actually we could care less.
Unfortunately that kind of apathy is why others will always wish to do harm to the US. The number of civilian casualties also gives these sickos the right, in their mind, to respond in kind. Not taking your government to task over how it treats other nations only blank cards what they do.
Ask yourself, if your family had been bombed by an army of some nation would you attack that same army and likely die or would you go after the first person, even a civi, from that nation to cross your path? Please be honest.
First, our government has been taken to task.....just watch CNN or MSNBC.
Second, if I lived in a country where I could not get ahead if I wanted to and if I spoke out against the government I would be killed or my town would be gassed, then I am not sure what I would think of an invading Army. Especially if people from my country told the other country they would be welcomed. I would also like to think that we could stop insurgents from other nations from stopping any type of progress.
Unfortunately that kind of apathy is why others will always wish to do harm to the US. The number of civilian casualties also gives these sickos the right, in their mind, to respond in kind. Not taking your government to task over how it treats other nations only blank cards what they do.
Ask yourself, if your family had been bombed by an army of some nation would you attack that same army and likely die or would you go after the first person, even a civi, from that nation to cross your path? Please be honest.
First, our government has been taken to task.....just watch CNN or MSNBC.
Second, if I lived in a country where I could not get ahead if I wanted to and if I spoke out against the government I would be killed or my town would be gassed, then I am not sure what I would think of an invading Army. Especially if people from my country told the other country they would be welcomed. I would also like to think that we could stop insurgents from other nations from stopping any type of progress.
Sure in the light of day the media and even politicians say they are fighting the good fight in congress and the senate. But the truth is often much more gray. What have they actually accompished beyond saying they want stuff like troop withdrawls and accountability? Two sides of the same coin in my opinion. Especially when the president can just veto anything he doesn't like.
Secondly, yes there are places in this world where oppression is very real and very brutal and I do feel we have a duty to save those that are helpless. But my point is that more often than us getting the bad guys we are killing the innocent and that has to stop. As a former soldier I can think of nothing that would make me more sick than knowing I killed an innocent person in a combat zone. Every ounce of training I have ever been given instills that in me.
I completely agree with you though, the influx of foreign fighters into Iraq is a serious problem that needs to be solved. I think I have it to, withdraw all US/UK troops to the Iraqi border for security. Let the Iraqi Army take over internal security and let the US/UK make sure they have the best chance of doing it right by stopping as much of that influx as possible. I think we would see the kind of pride that comes from securing your own house and lands shining in the free Iraqi people.