Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

If you were under 15 on 9/11 click here


  • Please log in to reply
1211 replies to this topic

#541    RaptorBites

RaptorBites

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,208 posts
  • Joined:12 Jan 2012

Posted 24 April 2012 - 09:15 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 24 April 2012 - 09:12 PM, said:

I can also vouch for that. I can still remember the cost of a 1" X 1" X 2" blanked aluminum angle that was part of a seat modification on the C-5 Galaxy. You can probably pick up a 10-foot section for a few dollars at a hardware store, but the government paid $1000.00 for four 2-inch pieces.

If possible, I could have received $15,000.00 from the government for a 10-foot section that would have cost me less than $10.00.

Not only that, I am good friends with the DFAC manager when I was stationed at FT. Lee, and I asked him if he could get me a simple meat thermometer.  Answer was no as they cost $50 from his budget.

OH WOW!

No, you surround yourself with a whole different kettle of crazy. - Sir Wearer of Hats

#542    booNyzarC

booNyzarC

    Forum Divinity

  • Closed
  • 13,536 posts
  • Joined:18 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 24 April 2012 - 10:40 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 24 April 2012 - 06:52 PM, said:

*snipped blah blah blah*

please enlighten me

*snipped blah blah blah*
You appear to be completely impervious to such a thing.


#543    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 25 April 2012 - 12:46 AM

View PostCzero 101, on 24 April 2012 - 07:20 PM, said:

What part of

"According to some estimates, we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions. We cannot share information from floor to floor in this building because it's stored on dozens of technological systems that are inaccessible or incompatible."

is unclear to you...?

You have been given this information SEVERAL times and yet you continually - one could even say purposely - misinterpret and refuse to acknowledge what is actually being said in favour of your unsubstantiated and patently false opinion that Rumsfeld was lying and saying something completely different.


Here again, the information has been given to you along with soiurces explaining that most of the transactions have been reconciled.

Why is it you continually fail to acknowledge the information given to you


READ THE INFORMATION THAT HAS BEEN PROVIDED


Sometimes explaining things to you is like trying to have a conversation with the intellectual double of a piece of navel lint.

And unfortunately, that's not even funny... its just sad.

So what is it Babe... are you purposely doing this just to get a rise out of people or are you really as willfully ignorant and obtuse as your posts make you out to be?

Inquiring minds want to know...

ETA...


This right here speaks volumes for your hypocrisy, biased and ignorant preconceptions and highlights your intellectual dishonesty.







Cz

Finally, we're getting somewhere!

We cannot track $2.3 is one statement.

We cannot share information between floors is another statement.

I understand the first, and find the second to be an extremely childish explanation for the first.  OMG, the various floors within the Pentagon are unable to communicate or share spreadsheets!  Call in the National Guard!!!   :w00t:

The various floors can't communicate, so we're unable to track this money.  I understand that's been the way the Pentagon does things for most of my adult life, but I don't buy the excuse.  I'm more skeptical that you weapons grade accountants here.

Further, by chance I happened to see Rummy being deposed, and I happened to see his press conference afterwards, and so have the benefit of having seen his body language.  Those who place all their faith in 'links' and the honesty of government officials that might not mean much, but body language says alot.  Rumsfeld smirked for the cameras because he had defeated McKinney's questions.  Very effectively, actually.

So you guys that believe all that nonsense about 19 arabs with box cutters can go ahead and believe all that nonsense about "We can't communicate between floors because our software and records are not compatible, cry me a river".  You've made your point gentlemen--you believe everything any government bureaucrat tells you, NO QUESTIONS ASKED.

Ah, the skeptical mind...  :wacko:


#544    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,610 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 25 April 2012 - 01:00 AM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 25 April 2012 - 12:46 AM, said:

Finally, we're getting somewhere!

We cannot track $2.3 is one statement.

We cannot share information between floors is another statement.

I understand the first, and find the second to be an extremely childish explanation for the first.  OMG, the various floors within the Pentagon are unable to communicate or share spreadsheets!  Call in the National Guard!!!   :w00t:

You didn't even understand what has been posted, which is typical of 9/11 Truthers who are lead by blind ignorance rather than facts and evidence..

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#545    RaptorBites

RaptorBites

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,208 posts
  • Joined:12 Jan 2012

Posted 25 April 2012 - 01:06 AM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 25 April 2012 - 12:46 AM, said:


We cannot track $2.3 is one statement.

We cannot share information between floors is another statement.

I understand the first, and find the second to be an extremely childish explanation for the first.  OMG, the various floors within the Pentagon are unable to communicate or share spreadsheets!  Call in the National Guard!!!   :w00t:

The various floors can't communicate, so we're unable to track this money.  I understand that's been the way the Pentagon does things for most of my adult life, but I don't buy the excuse.  I'm more skeptical that you weapons grade accountants here.


Great now that you understand we are getting somewhere.  

Every statement after this is pure blind ignorance and shows that YOU cannot accept reality and want to live in a world of fantasy.

No, you surround yourself with a whole different kettle of crazy. - Sir Wearer of Hats

#546    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 25 April 2012 - 01:14 AM

Raptor

That you and Cz and Boo accept such a facile explanation for the 'untracked' funds demonstrate your uncritical assessment.

Are you trying to have me believe that the Pentagon accounting system is just super advanced and beyond the comprehension of civilian accountants, or should I believe that their system is completely in the Dark Ages, and incomprehensible even within the building?  The left hand does not know what the right hand is doing, sort of thing?  Really?  :lol:

Are you really that gullible?

Stoopid question, I know..  :hmm:


#547    RaptorBites

RaptorBites

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,208 posts
  • Joined:12 Jan 2012

Posted 25 April 2012 - 01:41 AM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 25 April 2012 - 01:14 AM, said:

Raptor

That you and Cz and Boo accept such a facile explanation for the 'untracked' funds demonstrate your uncritical assessment.

Are you trying to have me believe that the Pentagon accounting system is just super advanced and beyond the comprehension of civilian accountants, or should I believe that their system is completely in the Dark Ages, and incomprehensible even within the building?  The left hand does not know what the right hand is doing, sort of thing?  Really?  :lol:

Are you really that gullible?

Stoopid question, I know..  :hmm:

Have you worked a Federal Job?  Have you  been in the Military?

Do you realize how old the laptops they are handing us for military use are?  You seem to think that technological advancements are happening all over the government.  Guess what you are wrong, dead wrong.  It is you who does not understand because you live in this fantasy world.

I have been deployed 3 times in the past 7 years and spent a little over half my military career under deployment.  Guess what?  Our computer systems where prone to A LOT of issues when I was in.

Military pay was sometimes backed up, WHY?  Because of computer issues.  Imangine being deployed and having pay issues.  Thats not a very fun thing to deal with.

So don't sit there on your high horse and tell me that you do not beleive for one second that our governments computer systems are so out-dated and incompatible, because YOU do not know what you are talking about.

Now tell me, have you worked for the federal government or the military before?  If you have not, then don't try to pass off your fantasy world as reality because you are making yourself look ignorant.

No, you surround yourself with a whole different kettle of crazy. - Sir Wearer of Hats

#548    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 25 April 2012 - 12:43 PM

I have not worked for the Federal government, but I have worked closely with the FAA.  Yes, I did 4 years in Army ROTC and 2 years active duty in Southeast Asia way back in 1970.

No sir, I do NOT think technological advances are happening all over the federal government, and I am NOT an accountant, but I have a fair understanding how accounting works, having hired several of them during my days as a businessman.

I'm sorry to hear your computers are screwed up, but not surprised.

None of those facts explain what happened to those "untracked" funds.  I am reminded of the "untracked" funds that Paul Bremer et al of the CPA experienced.  Of course that was US Currency, not funds on books somewhere.

Though I am sympathetic to your personal problems, I do not find your story particularly persuasive or even relevant to funds missing in the Pentagon from the 1990's.

Basically, you gents would have me believe that the excuse given by probably the most mendacious of federal agencies is valid and truthful on the surface.  You are suggesting to me that the same folks that brought us Reynolds v. U.S., the Gulf Of Tonkin, the Pat Tillman or Jessica Lynch stories, would not dissemble in a professional manner regarding missing funds.

Sorry Raptor, no can do.  :no:

H.L. Menken observed that "Faith may be defined briefly as an illogical belief in the occurrence of the improbable."

While I find it most improbable that the DoD has a reputation for telling the truth, you would have me accept their word on funds missing.  Sorry GI, no can do.

I watched Rummy's performance that day, and I spent enough time in the US Army to know he was stonewalling and smirking for a purpose.


#549    Rafterman

Rafterman

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,409 posts
  • Joined:27 Sep 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Upstate

Posted 25 April 2012 - 01:00 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 24 April 2012 - 06:39 PM, said:

I know it's a little complex for you to grasp, but Cynthia McKinney was not evidence of anything at all.  Her committee's investigation of missing Pentagon funds was evidence that Congress knew about the missing funds before Dubya took office, and Rummy's performance at that investigation was evidence of his stonewalling.

Denying certain historical events is not really 'dismantling' anything at all.

That's what you guys prefer not to talk about.  :yes:

As I said, plenty of folks are talking about it in this thread and doing a pretty good job of dismantling it.

So now McKinney isn't evidence?  Has that changed since you said this a couple pages back:

"She and her actions as chair of that committee are but ONE tiny sliver of evidence on a very very large pile of circumstantial evidence surrounding the events of 11 September."

"For me, it is better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."
                                                                                                                                           - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World:  Science as a Candle in the Dark

#550    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 25 April 2012 - 01:06 PM

You're getting a bit desperate, dude.

Or maybe I just was not clear enough?

The woman herself, CM, is evidence of NOTHING.

The matter her committee was investigating was evidence of something.

That something was funds missing from Pentagon coffers.

You gentlemen are saying that they weren't missing, they were simply untracked, and that because 60 years on, the accounting science and procedures in the Pentagon is in the dark ages, because within the outfit the software and computers are incompatible.

I'm saying that excuse is facile, especially considering the source.  I'm saying that missing funds are nothing new under the sun when it comes to the federal government, but you would have me believe this is simply an oversight, and that Rummy's testimony was honorable and above board.

Sorry GI, no can do.


#551    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,610 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 25 April 2012 - 03:49 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 25 April 2012 - 01:06 PM, said:

You gentlemen are saying that they weren't missing, they were simply untracked, and that because 60 years on, the accounting science and procedures in the Pentagon is in the dark ages, because within the outfit the software and computers are incompatible.

That is nothing new. There have been financial problems, but that was still no reason to fly an aircraft into the Pentagon.

Quote

Pentagon accounting problems 'serious': Treasury
(AFP)–Mar 9, 2011


WASHINGTON — The US administration is taking a hard look at problems in the Defense Department's accounting, after a report called its books unauditable, the Treasury said Wednesday.

Treasury assistant secretary Richard Gregg told a Congressional panel there were "serious financial reporting issues" at the Pentagon, which in the current proposed budget before the Congress receives $553 billion, or some 15% of all US annual spending. The remarks came after the US government watchdog the General Accounting Office (GAO) named problematic defense accounting standards as the primary reason it could not produce a full assessment of government spending in fiscal 2010.

The GAO cited "serious financial management problems at the Department of Defense (DoD) that have prevented DoD's financial statements from being auditable."Gregg said that Treasury, Defense, the GAO and the White House budget office have agreed a strategy to resolve some of DoD's "more significant accounting and audit weaknesses."The GAO report on fiscal 2010, released in December, said the auditor had no way of being sure if the defense department had the assets it recorded and whether they were in the condition claimed.

"As in past years, DoD did not maintain adequate systems or have sufficient records to provide reliable information on these assets," it said. "Deficiencies in internal control over such assets could affect the federal government's ability to fully know the assets it owns, including their location and condition."

My link


Edited by skyeagle409, 25 April 2012 - 03:56 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#552    RaptorBites

RaptorBites

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,208 posts
  • Joined:12 Jan 2012

Posted 25 April 2012 - 06:12 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 25 April 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

I have not worked for the Federal government, but I have worked closely with the FAA.  Yes, I did 4 years in Army ROTC and 2 years active duty in Southeast Asia way back in 1970.

So basically you don't know what you are talking about.

View PostBabe Ruth, on 25 April 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

No sir, I do NOT think technological advances are happening all over the federal government, and I am NOT an accountant, but I have a fair understanding how accounting works, having hired several of them during my days as a businessman.

Irrelevant because you do not how how out-dated the government's accounting systems are

View PostBabe Ruth, on 25 April 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

I'm sorry to hear your computers are screwed up, but not surprised.

So you are not surprised that the computers the government provides are not top of the line and out-dated. Good

View PostBabe Ruth, on 25 April 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

None of those facts explain what happened to those "untracked" funds.  I am reminded of the "untracked" funds that Paul Bremer et al of the CPA experienced.  Of course that was US Currency, not funds on books somewhere.

You are quite daft aren't you?  Out dated computer systems DECADES old that are INCOMPATIBLE.

Do you even understand what those words mean?

View PostBabe Ruth, on 25 April 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

I am sympathetic to your personal problems, I do not find your story particularly persuasive or even relevant to funds missing in the Pentagon from the 1990's.

My story was to get you to understand the relics we use in today's "modern" army.  It is obvious you do not understand that at all.

View PostBabe Ruth, on 25 April 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

Basically, you gents would have me believe that the excuse given by probably the most mendacious of federal agencies is valid and truthful on the surface.

I personally do not beleive you to even realize how ignorant you are when it comes to this topic.  Your mis-trust of the government is a big reason why you are biased to all accounts.  Nobody said we 100% beleive in everything the government says, based on other threads you have posted on, your classify us as being just that.  I am assuming to discredit our input on the subject.      

View PostBabe Ruth, on 25 April 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

You are suggesting to me that the same folks that brought us Reynolds v. U.S., the Gulf Of Tonkin, the Pat Tillman or Jessica Lynch stories, would not dissemble in a professional manner regarding missing funds.

What does that have to do anything regarding untracked funds?

View PostBabe Ruth, on 25 April 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

While I find it most improbable that the DoD has a reputation for telling the truth, you would have me accept their word on funds missing.  Sorry GI, no can do.

Again, we understand you have a mis-trust of the government.  Fine.  Stop using your bias and look at the facts.

View PostBabe Ruth, on 25 April 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

I watched Rummy's performance that day, and I spent enough time in the US Army to know he was stonewalling and smirking for a purpose.

Apperantly you are qualified as a visual lie detector.  Where did you learn that from?  TV?

No, you surround yourself with a whole different kettle of crazy. - Sir Wearer of Hats

#553    RaptorBites

RaptorBites

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,208 posts
  • Joined:12 Jan 2012

Posted 25 April 2012 - 06:20 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 25 April 2012 - 01:06 PM, said:

I'm saying that excuse is facile, especially considering the source.  I'm saying that missing funds are nothing new under the sun when it comes to the federal government, but you would have me believe this is simply an oversight, and that Rummy's testimony was honorable and above board.

So summed up, you do realize that missing funds are not new, but because Rumsfield said it, its all BS?  

:blink: :w00t:  :cry:

Edited by RaptorBites, 25 April 2012 - 06:21 PM.

No, you surround yourself with a whole different kettle of crazy. - Sir Wearer of Hats

#554    frenat

frenat

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 3,141 posts
  • Joined:22 Jun 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Wayne, IN

Posted 25 April 2012 - 07:02 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 25 April 2012 - 01:14 AM, said:

Raptor

That you and Cz and Boo accept such a facile explanation for the 'untracked' funds demonstrate your uncritical assessment.

Are you trying to have me believe that the Pentagon accounting system is just super advanced and beyond the comprehension of civilian accountants, or should I believe that their system is completely in the Dark Ages, and incomprehensible even within the building?  The left hand does not know what the right hand is doing, sort of thing?  Really?  :lol:

Are you really that gullible?

Stoopid question, I know..  :hmm:
In the Air Force CURRENTLY they still use DOS based programs for most of the fiance and personnel stuff.

-Reality is not determined by your lack of comprehension.
-Never let facts stand in the way of a good conspiracy theory.
-If I wanted to pay for commercials I couldn't skip I'd sign up for Hulu Plus.
-There are no bad ideas, just great ideas that go horribly wrong.
If you have to insist that you've won an Internet argument, you've probably lost badly. - Danth's Law

#555    Otto von Pickelhaube

Otto von Pickelhaube

    A complete moral vacuum

  • Member
  • 30,107 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Garmisch-Partenkirchen

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 25 April 2012 - 07:39 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 25 April 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

I have not worked for the Federal government, but I have worked closely with the FAA.  Yes, I did 4 years in Army ROTC and 2 years active duty in Southeast Asia way back in 1970.

No sir, I do NOT think technological advances are happening all over the federal government, and I am NOT an accountant, but I have a fair understanding how accounting works, having hired several of them during my days as a businessman.

I'm sorry to hear your computers are screwed up, but not surprised.

None of those facts explain what happened to those "untracked" funds.  I am reminded of the "untracked" funds that Paul Bremer et al of the CPA experienced.  Of course that was US Currency, not funds on books somewhere.

Though I am sympathetic to your personal problems, I do not find your story particularly persuasive or even relevant to funds missing in the Pentagon from the 1990's.

Basically, you gents would have me believe that the excuse given by probably the most mendacious of federal agencies is valid and truthful on the surface.  You are suggesting to me that the same folks that brought us Reynolds v. U.S., the Gulf Of Tonkin, the Pat Tillman or Jessica Lynch stories, would not dissemble in a professional manner regarding missing funds.

So you're saying that because the Govt (or specifically the DoD) says something, then it must be untrue?
Now, assuming that there was an enormous fiddle here, are you suggesting that the Govt. (and specifically Rumsfeld) were at a level of diabolical cunning enough to engineer an atrocity on this scale just to cover up financial shenanigans, even ones on an epic scale? (since I assume that the whole 9/11 plot must have been all a part of this plot, unless Rumsfeld did happen to have a plane [or a drone, or a missile] all ready having been prepared earlier just in case the opportunity arose, so they could conveniently blame it on Al Qeada?) And was this purely Rumsfeld and the Bush Admininstration behind this, amd if so how on earth did they manage to arrange it all so quickly, seeing as they'd only been in office nine months by that time?

If, as it seems, we are in the process of becoming a totalitarian society in which the state apparatus is all-powerful, the ethics most important for the survival of the true, free, human individual would be: cheat, lie, evade, fake it, be elsewhere, forge documents, build improved electronic gadgets in your garage that’ll outwit the gadgets used by the authorities.

- Philip K. Dick.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users