Discussion in 'Current Events' started by wkmac, Oct 29, 2010.
Inspector general's report raises alarms about funds inside Defense Department
To say no records were kept is a little misleading isn't it?
Good question. Why don't you contact WorldNet Daily and ask them why they choose to run such a headline.
For schitts and giggles, let's re-write this story to reflect in another light and then see what we think about these records or questionable lack thereof.
Would you be consistent and apply the same standard to one department of gov't that you apply to others?
Sure I will. I'm not a fan of any department of government and I think a report such as this is a good reason but for far different reasons than one like you does. Reading the report it seems like the biggest problem the government has is the government violated some rule that the government deposit money in a government account. Doesn't seem like that is even practical for the government to do in a combat zone.
So when you read the report they decided to "clarify" it to say that there was no record of a deposit fund account.
So yes I think your title is more than a little misleading. To say no records were kept when even your article says that not only were records kept they likely still exist in storage is misleading and I had only asked since I was curious if it were intentional or not. I didn't think you were gonna claim worldnet made you do it or government made you do it. That was unexpected.
Do you have a cutsie youtube video for the difference in likely and probably? I'm to lazy to find one for ya.
If you actually go to the link this is what you'll see.
I took the WND article headline as the thread title, and the secondary headline for the buried link, Again, don't like it, contact WND.
It does not matter if I like it or not. The implication of my question was if you were intentional about being misleading and I guess your answer is yes you were so the question becomes why? Is it as simple as you want to bash all things government(which I could agree with) or is it that you cannot find an inefficiency in the government that actually has an impact on our lives. Let's be honest here, the government is plenty inefficient with our money so why do you act surprised that they were inefficient with the Iraqi's money?
The problem they are claiming is that there was not enough government involved. I'd think you, since you claim you want no government, would be happy they used less government. Less is closer to no. Since it appears that you are angry that a government agency did not use enough other government agencies will you hold yourself to that standard with other government agencies as well?
I wonder what would have happened if I had offered to pay an Iraqi contractor with a US dept. of treasury check instead of cash?
I didn't even have to click on the link to read the actual report which I did.
Separate names with a comma.