*Warnings, as usual, from the mind who invented “Cleverly gently martial in spirit” as the motto for their First Panzer Psyops Corp. Your mind is defenseless against such a mind.
This added much later :
David Chandler is a solid scientist, and his analysis is very convincing, much better than Barbara Honneger’s below. Honneger is, from this evidence, wrong.
I based a lot of this on Honneger, and now will need to go back through the evidence wrt the explosions in the computer.
9/11 was a false flag. The plane that hit the Pentagon was an AA of the right type, maybe. However, the FBI could not find images in the 88 or so security cameras. ??
The computers were destroyed, the people in the Pentagon were apparently really killed, and I assume the ‘smell of cordite, not jet fuel’, was not made up? Anyway, that removes the mystery of how they convinced the entire Pentagon it was an airplane, it was an airplane. And all of the claims of ‘never found engines’, I never saw it challenged before.
I believe it was Tarpley who analyzed this kind of operation and said here are always disinfo campaigns along with the main op so as to confuse everything. OK, but science works, the reality finally works out.
But I don’t have time to do anything instantly, this will take a while. Meanwhile, I leave this here to remind us all I can be wrong, and that FF and Hoax operations are hard to grasp, take a long time and a lot of eyes. But the world is doing a good job of citizen research on this, imho.
This added later: Be clear that the $2.3T is pure accounting ephemera that has no direct relationship to any amount that might have stolen. It is the total of the reconciliation entries needed to balance the Pentagon’s books. So various people saying “$9T and it went to the Israelis”, etc., is nonsense. The number probably varied every day as they made different pieces of the accounting systems work a bit better in automated form. That number and the incompatibility of accounting systems are definitely NOT the issue. The issue is that the system as described can be gamed. Add secrecy and a general attitude of ‘not something I should ask about’, and it will be gamed and in any large organization of people, is gamed. There are, of course, 2+ levels of audits, including individual units and the books as they are rolled into higher-level accounts. I have no reason to doubt any of them. But the system as described is vulnerable to fraud, and the Inspector General’s reports do not indicate how that is prevented.
Every time I begin thinking down any line of thought, I run into obvious questions and questions about why the have never been asked or the possible answers investigated.
Consider the Pentagon’s $2,300,000,000,000, hereafter $2.3T T for trillion dollars, that Rumsfeld announced the ‘Pentagon can’t account for’.
As a professional at Psyops in my other personna, I am very impressed with that bit of theatre. Don’t they make it seem like just an accounting problem? Otherwise you can’t accumulate $2.3T you can’t account for in one year, as they were charged with. So just very busy people with changes going on all the time and never quite the priority given to accounting as compared to doing the primary task, accounting later, when we get around to it. And then the quiet confidence that it would just take great effort for a period of years, but dedicated people would straighten everything out, there was no real problem to be worried about, just professional embarrassment that we look so bad in front of Congress.
Very very convincing, I thought, those hearings, the press conference on September 10, 2001.
Then I find this, there must have been many like that, which amplifies those very rational and reasonable takes on the problems and casts anyone doubting the good intentions and great honesty and hard work of our national military and civilian leaders as much-despised conspiracy theorists. The money hasn’t gone “missing” (despite the cuts in the video above), it merely can’t be accounted for across the incompatible accounting systems used by different services.
But, it seems to me a significant tell, that little twitch of the eyebrow that tells us how false the story, was the explosions in the Pentagon the next day, those 9/11 terrorist bastards blew up all of our computers and destroyed all of our noble Pentagon accountants’ hard, but accurate, accounting work. And killed so many of them. By great good fortune, Dov Zacheim escaped that day, as did the 4K people who worked in the WTC towers, but used an Israeli messaging service. They were warned ahead of time to do their insider trading from home, which so many apparently did, as the SEC accumulated records for the largest insider trading investigation in the agency’s history before they decided there was no one really guilty, and destroyed all the records of the largest such investigation in history. I have not heard why. Have you?
It seems to me that the amount of effort that the 9/11 planners put into destroying those Pentagon computers, explosions inside the Pentagon that filled the Pentagon with the smell of cordite, not jet fuel, indicates that the problem is not a simple accounting error, rather that something more serious is being hidden, and has been happening for long enough that our military leadership is willing to go along with false flag ops that kill its own people to cover it up. Even given our modern military leadership’s failures, the method of eradicating that problem cannot have been good for military morale and the lack of mass resignation of officers in protest of the obvious lies explaining all of this indicates things are not going to get better soon. Certainly one should not trust any military officer purporting to be a solution to any of our political problems.
The bit from Carl Levin “paying out a half a billion dollars that isn’t owed”. This was 15 years ago, half a billion dollars can be spent now in training half a dozen jihadis in Jordan and have the General responsible promoted afterwards, but half a billion used to mean something.
Does that lost money Levin mentions associate with the prior discussion of problems with the complexity of payroll, or other programs? No indication. I can understand what happens with paychecks, that is complicated and the bureaucracy doesn’t keep up with the reality of people’s status changes, so it will always be out of sync. No big deal I am sure that is accounted for, or close enough.
But for payments of operating expenses for military entities? Or payments associated with weapons programs, generally to a supplier? That would mean either there are no signoffs of invoices before checks are cut, or that there are no audits for such and discipline for incorrect signoffs. Either way, it is a rather large hole in an accounting system, and must be evaluated carefully and often if one is to have any idea at all how much is being stolen, because that human-operated system allows money to be stolen, easily. If there were to be less-than-stringent and careful control of the power to print a check for an invoice, e.g. of unknown validity, not signed, it is more obvious, but the same flaw at base.
The above discussion lumps everything in that sum of the accounts that don’t balance, along with one data point of $.5B in what is very likely really lost money, and that isn’t discussed further either.
Accountants have standard methods to check integrity of the system and operations. For example, randomly pick 100 checks and trace them through the system. Who owns the account they end in? Ask that entity “What did invoice did you count this check as payment for?”
That is, as I think about an accounting problem and lost money, it usually means I have a record of payment, check stub, to someone that our company paid, and we don’t know what invoice it is for, so are unable to debit the appropriate controlling account nor credit the checking account, the kind of accounting error the Pentagon is having at higher levels. So we call them up and ask them. That is, our bank knows where the money went, the bank paid out that money, an accounting transaction moving the amount into another’s account. We know who we wrote it to, there really should be no big deal tracking the money to one or more invoices. Not being able to do that requires 2 companies to have accounting problems, very unlikely, or not being able to identify the recipient of the check. But of course the bank knows who it was paid to, that is what ‘know your customer is all about’, isn’t it?
I read through the Inspector General’s report on the Pentagon’s accounting problems. The problem is characterized as entirely Department-level problems making accounts agree. I see nothing that discusses audits of things at the dispersal-of-funds level, the discussion is entirely on the problem of dealing with accounting errors at the department level accounts.
There is at least a huge hole between the two systems revealed by this report : balancing accounts is how you know money is not being spent correctly. These guys run on budgets. If some JRandom Colonel decides to write a check to a friend to pay for a service on an account JR doesn’t have signature authority for, it is not clear the Pentagon’s system will detect that. A point that I never saw discussed in any of these reports.
So, we have this problem that everything is very innocent and above board, yet someone went to considerable extra work to prevent us from having the evidence to ever think otherwise. Extreme work, if you consider bombs and killing people to be extreme. It could not have been that easy to get serious explosives inside the Pentagon and into those computers, wired to be detonated when other things exploded. Bad job of wiring, it seems, with consequent interesting items in the story line Barbara Honnegger lays out.
If you go watch this, you will see that nothing makes sense except as a plan for destruction of that accounting system and covering up that attack as a general attack on the Pentagon :
You will see that witnesses say bombs went off inside the Pentagon’s computers holding all of that data, killed 42 people working on the accounting issues, all of whom worked for Dov Zacheim, a dual-citizen Israeli-American who was tight with the cabal who did 9/11. Watch that, think about how they hid the effect of a Pentagon filled with cordite fumes and people knowing that multiple explosions had happened, being able to see the sources of the special effects? A bunch of people who had been trained at making explosions happen? More than a few dissidents have rejected the entire edifice, and consider it inherently corrupt. We had much clear evidence of corruption in Vietnam**. It certainly is not competent after 9/11.
Relief of generals has become so rare that a private who loses his rifle is now punished more than a general who loses his part of the war.
And we know that is related to the slide at 2:12:11, which says
Steve Pieczenik, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State to Three Presidents Is Willing to Name Under Oath The Military General on Deput Secretary of Defense Wolfowitz’s staff who told him 9/11 was a False Flag Attack. “They Ran The Attacks,” The general said of Wolfowitz, VP Cheney, Cheney aide Stephen Hadley, Elliot Abrams and Condolezza Rice, Among others.
Status Quo, our political leaders, Congress, our great investigators of the important questions of the day do not appear to have noticed any of this, not the 9/11 FF, nor the Pentagon’s lost funds, nor the incompetence of the officer corps, nor the deep corruption of our political, social and economic scenes these surely highlight in such bright and vivid hues.
Just like nobody notices all of the indications that the gold is gone from the vaults and the so-obviously so-probable indications of corruption, equally highlighted across the spectrum of our elites.
It seems to me a good comparison would be the accounting system and reporting before the finding of what was judged to be massive fraud, e.g. Indian Affairs. Not the same class of fraud, but one going on for 100+ years and massive coverup and payments to everyone, thus parallel to this one, you can be sure.
Looking for links to the internal critiques, everywhere I found the War College’s version whitewashed and moved to support the definition of the problem, the interpretation of history, as a military being trained for conventional warfare, officers and troops not being able to handle terrorism. Surely if they had a clue, they would have used it by now? So far as any outsider can see, and all the insider leakage says we are right, the military’s goals are to spend money in extending the wars, and hide all the results as mere spreading terrorism. Works too. Very well, up until the last 6 or so months where the web presence has finally outdone MSM as government and deep state amplifiers.
The web amplifiers have taken citizen journalism and made it worth something. Laugh at Facebook, consider it as just another propaganda medium, as our email and web blogs and comments have been used, but Facebook has more feedbacks and more filters than anything except a coffeeklatch and massive feeds of information of all kinds going into the world’s communities. It is a superior medium to anything MSM has, really. Already my wife and kid comment on people’s political opinions and how much they do or do not know about particular events, and other peoples’ opinions of everyone involved.
These are people doing what people do to calibrate what is in their best interest. What has been very against their local and individual interests have been anything from the center. Whatever it was, it changed things, which meant broke things, in their understandings. Normans arriving in an English Saxon village were conquerors, and local leaders and dependencies were changed, it took generations to reorganize everyone’s understandings and play the game well for all sides, so many conflicting loyalties and economic forces. They gossiped, learning to calibrate everyone is what gossip does for you. The original medium being the message, I think.
And the same is what happened to every community or neighborhood or school again and again over the last 150 years, our government arrived to fix things and stuff changed once again. Gradually our communities and neighborhoods and schoolboards and all the other local institutions have faded in importance as the central institutions and the direction of our society was taken from us, inexorably, driven by social dynamics common to royal courts and big power bureaucracies.
Concentration of any kind of power still produces the excellent advisors who urge great caution via huge spending, whether on education or defense buildups, and those advisors really know because they are that kind of people, grew up in that country or that impovrished background, and have a great grasp of things there and and heartfelt in their help for us to do this thing for the safety of my new Homeland. Remember that message? Kissinger and then Brzyznev. Such a very standard thing this all is, judging from the history books, but I have never seen any real discussion of the patterns of advisors getting so very rich from their advice. Nor the pattern of the psyops. How Hitler’s people did it here, how Stalins’ there, and a lot of look at what is happening here, but a never a list of general stages so we could compare to our own coup***.
So my overview summary says the military is hopelessly corrupt. How could it be otherwise, and produce and deploy the weapons it has? Carrier groups in an age of hypersonic anti-ship missiles with or without nuclear weapons. F-35s while trying for every one of the last 20 years to get rid of the A-10. And the Navy has never been reassuring about this, and I have seen concerned-to-very worried echoes of that discussion in all those dimensions several place since.
Because our military is corrupt, the officer corps is dishonest. Without honor, winning military conflict against any enemy is unlikely. Without honor, not much can possibly work well in a modern complex world such as a military. Actually primitive militaries without honorable leaders also do not work well. And we haven’t. And we won’t, because we can’t.
But they can destroy our own country in a civil war against citizens trying to take back the power in their countries. And win. They think.
**I vouch for the authenticity of the person telling me this, he was who he said he was, big family and long associations of people at the party, and have no real reason to believe he was lying.
Probably 10 years ago at a birthday part of one of my wife’s friends, I talked to an inlaw of one side of his family. Guy was ethnic, retired, spoke French for some reason I don’t recall, and so had been an interpreter for a major military leader in Vietnam, as they discussed how much for what PX supplies transferred from military to black market and local bars and brothals. That makes it almost seem rational, good policy, supporting entertainment for the troops, but he said the officers made good $, and his retirement was much better because of it.
***Everytime I see Wesley Clark’s statement that ‘it was a policy coup’, I become irrate. That was an intentional downgrade in his vocabulary. Policy coups don’t kill 3K people. This was a declaration of war on the American people.
As usual, Orlov says the same thing, but he is a prominent blogger.
Added much later :