I have yet to hear a good answer to this question:

If Donald Rumsfeld wanted to cover up the loss of $2.2 trillion by the government, why would he even mention the loss of all that money to the public?

Will an answer that is strictly opinion do??

(Man, we really need a Skeptics section.)

You are ASSUMING he didn't have to announce it.

I'm pretty sure at some point they HAVE to make the accounts available to the public, remember this was pre 9/11 when American was'nt a olicharchy :) , theres probably a new law now where its all secret unless supreme leader Bush says so.

Am I? Why don't you show me the law that states that Rumsfeld must make all of the Pentagon's finances public?

How does "pretty sure" amount to anything?

Regardless if it was "law" or not.....

Have you ever heard of the acronym C.Y.A?

Now nobody can say he didn't say anything.

Why is it so hard to just say "cover your ass"? I hate acronyms more than I hate the Green Bay Packers.

How would anybody have even known about this if he HADN'T said anything????

Huh?

So he's supposed to simply assume that 2.2 trillion missing dollars would go unnoticed forever?

Apparently you haven't grasped the concept of the amount of money this is.

Yes the pentagon has deep pockets but this is hardly an amount that could have been snuck out of the petty cash drawer!

Look at some point the pentagon has to reveal it's accounts, it would be obvious to everyone that 2.2 trillion dollars was missing, if Rumsfeld or someone at the pentagon knew of the pending attack they coud use it to bury any bad news that could damage them, i'd say the day before 9/11 happened would be a great time to get bad news out, would anyone be interested in this story after 10:30 on the morening of the 11th, not a chance.

Pretty sure was a figure of speach, if you want i'll change it to DEFINATLY if you want me to ?.

I'm not saying it would go unnoticed by everyone. I'm saying that there's no need for him to reveal it to the PUBLIC. I'm sure he'd have to reveal it to the proper authorities, but they are under no obligation whatsoever to tell us about their financial situation.

Your right, there is no law saying public departments have to announce when they lose track of an astronomical amout of taxpayer funding. What was I thinking?

:rolleyes:

So, Rumsfeld couldn't have kept the money hidden forever, no matter what happened, right? Is this what you're saying?

What's stopping you from showing me the law?

Do you not understand the english language?

Why do you like asking me if I am saying something that I didn't say?

I said he was COVERING HIS ASS.

Which of those words do you not understand?

Apparently you believe there was a 100% chance he COULD have kept it hidden no matter what happened.

Because I wasn't sure if that's what you were saying.

I don't, in fact. Even with 9/11. After things had cooled down, this would get picked up again.

Also, why would Rumsfeld be covering his ass? The first Bush budget hadn't got into effect yet. Twas Clinton lost that money.

so you think these people are willing to kill thousands of people in order to start a war and then cover up mass murder, but they're not willing to lie about 2.3 trillion and cover that up?

How do you lie and cover up $2.3 TRILLION dollars???

That's what I want to know. 9/11 or no, how could Rumsfeld have hoped to to cover this up?

it was an accounting problem it's not like this was part of the defense department's budget for 1999 and someone stole it. 2.3 trillion is 1/4 of our national debt. this was a problem with accounting.

Exactly my friend, there was no way he could even hope to cover it up, so what the next best thing to do ? bury it before a BIG story is about to break= possible foreknowledge.

It's an old political trick, get the bad news out either before a big story or in the wake of a big story.
9/11=HUGE HUGE HUGE story.

I'm not offering this as any kind of cold hard proof but it just adds to the ever mounting circustantial evidence.

Add this to Rummy's little prediction over breakfast on the morning of 9/11 of a "event" in the next few months that would be "shocking" that would remind everyone how important it was to have a healthy defence department.

Again if anyone says "well he said the next few months" , he's hardly going to say "theres gonna be an event this morning" this was Rummies little way of making himself out to be some kind of great predicter of events, he's an arrogant son of a bitch with a big ego.

LIHOP?

Again, there's another thing Rummy definitely didn't need to bring up. If you folks are talking about the money so much, what makes you think that 9/11 covered it up?

And yes, I'd love to go get some pancakes.

No but he's such an ego driven cuntbag he couldn't help himself.

Well it did cover it up because people are only just finding out about it 5 years later, hence why project9 didn't think this annoucment even happened, hence why he had to ask for clarification from people who have actually done some research about the main players behaviour before 9/11.

Knock yourself out with the pancakes mate, i couldn't give a flying shit what you eat.

Let it happen on purpose, as opposed to MIHOP (Made it happen on purpose), and Litoa (Let it happen on accident, in other words, the non-CTs)

Personally I prefer LAGTTIHOP, which stands for "let's all go to the international house of pancakes!"

Hmmm, speaking of actually doing research, maybe you should look at this article:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/01/29/...ain325985.shtml

People are just finding out about this five years later, huh? Better check the date on that article.

That's hilarious if you think I would actually be offended by that. People generally don't care what other people eat.

You know what? I don't give a flying fuck what pair of pants you put on this morning. Nope! Aren't you offended??????

Why do you even use that LIHOP acronym? Why the fuck is there this fancy acronym for letting things happen on purpose? Who came up with this stupid acronym? Why don't people just say what they mean instead of using acronyms like all the cool truthers are using?

Question:- Why did rumsfeld talk about the missing 2.3Trilion on Sept 10 2001?

I`l give MY logical guess-
Pentagon/Rumsfeld are answerable to someone about their budget-

1-To whom r the pentagon answerable? -
Answer:- To the people who allot the budget [As far I know - US House of Representatives (Office of Management and Budget),or the Congress]

2-Why r they answerable?-
Answer:- Since they (Pentagon/Rumsfeld) are the ones who r going to request a budget again for the next year.

3-So why make it public?
-Answer:-So Rumseled was actually trying to give an explanation for the wastage to the ones to whom he would ask (beg) money again the next year. In other words he was trying to make it appear as if he was ready/open to correct the pentagons mistakes (of wastage), so that things would be a little easier. My opinion- He was indirectly trying to explain it to the budget committee more than to the people- Thats why choose a day so people can easily forget-One option - Sept 10 2001.

Fair enough?

It's great someone else has had this curiousity on this "un-accountable" 2,300,000,000,000 dollars back in 2k1.

IMO, it does have something to do with the events on the day after the press release.

Has the money been accounted for ? As far as know, no. It was forgotten in the shock and awe of 911.

It's just one of many "benefits", to some, that came from the tragedies of Sept.11.

Oh, WOW....well that just puts the whole issue to bed now doesn't it??? :lol:

Please.... 99% of people know nothing about this story.

I dont understand that-

• 9/11 (8:44 am) - Donald Rumsfeld is in his office at the Pentagon talking about missile defense and the risk of terrorism and predicts there will be a terrorist attack two minutes before the first plane crashes into the WTC.

"Inside, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld had some people in to talk about missile defense and the risk that terrorism seen in the past would happen again.
“Let me tell ya,” he said, “I’ve been around the block a few times. There will be another event.”
Two minutes later, a plane smashed into the first World Trade Center tower and proved him right." - Fayetteville Observer/AP (09/16/01)

(See also: 9/11 - Rumsfeld predicts attacks for the 2nd time of the day; October 12, 2001 - In an interview by Parade Magazine, Rumsfeld talks as if the Pentagon was hit by a missile on 9/11; December 24, 2004 - In a speech, Donald Rumsfeld talks as if the plane that was said to have crashed in Pennsylvania on 9/11 was shot down)