Jump to content

Pentagon loses $ 6.6 billion of cash meant for Iraq.


Recommended Posts

http://society.ezinemark.com/6.6-billion-cash-have-been-stolen-from-pentagon-180c891b4ee.html

 

http://rt.com/usa/news/money-us-iraq-cash/

 

Despite an investigation the Pentagon can not trace the cash meant for Iraq's reconstruction.

 

Some suggest it was American Tax money, others report it was Iraq's money from sales of resources.

 

"The mystery is a growing embarrassment to the Pentagon, and an irritant to Washington's relations with Baghdad. Iraqi officials are threatening to go to court to reclaim the money, which came from Iraqi oil sales, seized Iraqi assets and surplus funds from the United Nations' oil-for-food program"

(Quote from top link)

 

How the heck can that happen ? http://m.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/mar/20/usa.iraq?cat=world&type=article

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bang goes the Iraq/US good relationship, won't be long before more financial irregularities start being thrown, a lot of people made money out his war, the Bush family especially.

 

I remember a very good friend of mine based in Iraq, telling me stories of dollars & gold being ferried around by troops, in his words not all of it reached it destination, both US & UK senior officers were creaming off, as well as senior officers taking backhanders from private security companies in order to use government assigned troops for private business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bang goes the Iraq/US good relationship, won't be long before more financial irregularities start being thrown, a lot of people made money out his war, the Bush family especially.

 

I remember a very good friend of mine based in Iraq, telling me stories of dollars & gold being ferried around by troops, in his words not all of it reached it destination, both US & UK senior officers were creaming off, as well as senior officers taking backhanders from private security companies in order to use government assigned troops for private business.

 

Interesting,thank-you.

I wonder if it will get a mention in our main media ? They seem pretty quiet on it at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it is being covered but it's hardly surprising that the media isn't exactly jumping on it like it's hot stuff.

 

it's an ancient story after all and has been covered extensively in the past. Both Panarama and Dispatches have made special programmes about it, and that's just in the UK. I remember the story breaking several years ago - at least as far back as 2007.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More than likely they'll be some coverage, once it's been watered down, I doubt we’ll ever know the whole truth; anybody who has the guts to come forward will be classed as crackpots or conspiracy theorists.

 

It would be interesting if senior military officers & ministers/senators who had direct involvement in the Iraq conflicts, had their accounts investigated/audited, let’s see how much money can then be accounted for again I doubt if that’ll ever happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More than likely they'll be some coverage, once it's been watered down, I doubt we’ll ever know the whole truth; anybody who has the guts to come forward will be classed as crackpots or conspiracy theorists.

 

It would be interesting if senior military officers & ministers/senators who had direct involvement in the Iraq conflicts, had their accounts investigated/audited, let’s see how much money can then be accounted for again I doubt if that’ll ever happen.

 

Yes I can see it now the US admitting some of their senior officers are corrupt, not this century I think!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it is being covered but it's hardly surprising that the media isn't exactly jumping on it like it's hot stuff.

 

it's an ancient story after all and has been covered extensively in the past. Both Panarama and Dispatches have made special programmes about it, and that's just in the UK. I remember the story breaking several years ago - at least as far back as 2007.

 

It was but as I vaguely remember at the time it was denied, & as the op links show when it was first identified those involved stated they could account for the missing funds if given time to audit correctly. Unfortunately there are powerful individuals who will put barriers in the way of any legitimate investigation.

 

I guarantee over the development of this story they’ll be vast amounts of money in which they’ll suddenly account for, but for security reasons they’ll say they can’t give an in-depth/clear answers as this will endanger individuals. You can write the script before they do; we’ve seen it all before, but not on such a grand scale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting,thank-you.

I wonder if it will get a mention in our main media ? They seem pretty quiet on it at the moment.

 

It was on BBC Panorama 3 years ago.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7444083.stm

 

In the Financial Times 4 years ago.

 

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/48a03a58-0885-11dc-b11e-000b5df10621.html

 

"Conspiracy" sites have just found out about it I take it :cool:

 

I think you'll find the FT and Independent are carrying the story currently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was on BBC Panorama 3 years ago.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7444083.stm

 

In the Financial Times 4 years ago.

 

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/48a03a58-0885-11dc-b11e-000b5df10621.html

 

"Conspiracy" sites have just found out about it I take it :cool:

 

I think you'll find the FT and Independent are carrying the story currently.

 

Yes Longcol we know this thanks.

The reason it is out again is ,the investigation hasn't found it as those watching the panorama programme three years ago might have expected.

I wonder if they will do a follow up ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.