Wednesday, May 1, 2013

Ottawa "loses track" of 3.1 billion dollars meant "to fight terror"

Muddying the waters
Between 2001 and 2009, Ottawa awarded $12.9-billion to 35 departments and agencies charged with ensuring the safety of Canadians to use for public security and fighting terrorism. The money was allocated through the Public Security and Anti-Terrorism Initiative......

But Auditor-General Michael Ferguson said only $9.8-billion of that money was identified in reports to the Treasury Board as having been spent specifically on anti-terrorism measures by the departments and agencies. The rest was not recorded as being used for that purpose. 
 "The rest was not recorded as being used for that purpose"

Then what purpose was the money used for?
 Did you actually read that sentence?
This money is not lost. It went somewhere??????
 It was just not recorded being used for the purposes that were claimed.
This is some fancy obfuscation.

“It’s important for there to be a way for people to understand how this money was spent,” Mr. Ferguson told reporters after the report was tabled in Parliament Tuesday. “And that summary reporting was not done.”

Translation: The money was spent and the government is not recording the where or when of it.
The Auditor is here to make the misappropriation look like bumbling or ineptitude. It isn't.

In response to the auditor’s report, the government released several examples of PSAT funding that was allocated between 2001 and 2009 but not reported through the Treasury Board. For example, National Defence spent $510-million on military operations such as the mission in Afghanistan.
 $510 million dollars in Afghanistan to ensure the safety of  Canadians in Canada? Sounds like covert ops funding to me...

The government said that more than $100-million in funding lapsed at Public Safety and the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority, whereas the Canadian Security Intelligence Service spent $100-million of its PSAT funding on secret initiatives, with little information provided to the public.
 CSIS spent 100 million on "secret initiatives" with no public information. Running patsies, perhaps?

 Tony Clement "acknowledged the lack of a “whole of government” approach to the spending, because the departments involved in the anti-terror initiatives were allowed to report individually."

This approach is designed to allow spending to go unreported. Many hands make light work and they also make it easier to hide the work done by all the hands

He agreed that the original plans to lay out the entire amount under one umbrella were “not up to par,” while stating that there is no evidence of wrongdoing.

"There is no evidence of wrong doing"
Define: no evidence of wrong doing?
Because there is definitely evidence of wrong doing.
 $ 3.1 billion dollars has been spent in an unaccountable manner.
What Mr Clement means when he claims" lack of evidence of wrong doing", is this....  nothing was done that was wrong. It was all as it should be.
There is no indication by the Auditor-General that any funds have gone missing, that any funds have been misappropriated or that any funds have been misspent,” Mr. Clement said.
Of course there is no evidence of funds misspent or misappropriated. Some person or persons knows where the funds went and how they were spent.
Simply put the so called democratically elected government, servant of the people, isn't telling the serfs where their money went. That is not accountability by any stretch of the imagination.



  1. This is a seedy government by any measure. Canada is a youngster now, courted by an international gang with domination on their mind. This money is missing because junior members of the gang get to buy the beer. It gets better, sooner or later blood and money may be required. Still Canada is a big vibrant land with bright people who will resist being stampeded by the terror meme as your expose' shows. R. Olausen.

    1. Thanks R Olausen

      Canada is a big vibrant land with bright people
      I agree
      Sadly there are many who have been manipulated via fear
      These individuals have to realize the fear is being used against them
      They have to wake up to the manipulation
      And then resist
      Glad you are out there along with me :)

  2. Sounds like the money went to unscrupulous people and for distasteful things. In other words, criminal purposes that those controlling the government want to keep secret.

    вот так

  3. Dear Penny,

    If I may ...

    "loose" rhymes with "goose" and is the opposite of "tight"

    "lose" rhymes with "ooze" and is the opposite of "find"

    Delete this comment if you wish, or do not publish it at all.

    But please fix your headline.

    you're welcome

    1. You may and I did, but...

      My spelling mistakes are not the issue
      A comment of substance would have been more appropriate
      Pointing out typos and spelling errors as the only comment are usually done as cheap shots

    2. Hello again Penny.

      I have no wish to take any cheap shots, nor do I want to sidetrack the discussion. I agree that spelling mistakes are not the issue. That's why I suggested that maybe you shouldn't publish my comment.

      The thing is: when you mangle a common word in a prominent place, it detracts from your post, from the impact that your post could have had.

      It also makes your blog look as if you don't know what you're doing, which is clearly not the case. (If it were, I wouldn't bother reading you, or leaving any comments.)

      In other words, you do so much good research, and clear thinking, that it's a shame when your writing fails to reflect the quality of your thoughts.

      In any case: The headline looks a lot better now, which is all I was hoping for, really. And I do hope you will delete this comment, as well as the other comments about spelling, so that the thread can stay on the same topic as the post.

      I apologize for any misunderstanding about my motives and I wish you well. Thank you for your kind attention.

    3. Thanks for clarifying

  4. maybe it went to fund terrorism?

  5. Remember the LIBERALS were in power from 2001-2006, six of the nine years the funds were missing. Why was it not uncovered during this period. How much was mismanaged then and how much after PC came to power. The Auditor General should give a yearly break down on how much was misappropriated each year and by what party. Give us the facts not just a general statement making it look like the funds went missing yesterday.

  6. I don't concern myself with oppisames
    Liberals or Conservatives
    They both sell Canadians down the river just the same
    I prefer no central government, personally
    That said the Harper junta is in charge, it is there responsibility
    No excuses

  7. Yes it is their responsibility to show where the funds were allocated during his term. The same should have been for the Liberals or any other party in power. Auditor General should have been on this years ago. Maybe we should start by looking at their office first.

    1. Who ever is the so called government of this nation is responsible
      I don't play blame the liberals or cons
      I blame those that are governing presently.

      If I have not made myself clear, this is a ruse to cover up the diversion of funds
      To legitimize the misdirection of Canadian tax payer dollars.

  8. Is it possible that the Federal Government redirected the "missing" 3.1 billion dollars of taxpayers money off-shore, to Israel as part of an international anti terrorism program? mmmm.

    1. Define "an international anti-terrorism program" involving Israel?
      I have no wish to misunderstand what you are suggesting?

  9. thanks for share..